H 


■ 
1 


mat 
m¥ 


■ 


■ 


graftal 


■ 


fefe 


lilltiiiili^ 


^ 


IS3E 


■ 


BR  121  .G72  1890 

Gray,  George  Zabnskie,  183 

-1889. 

The  church's  certain  faith 


33p  tjje  late  iDcan  <£5rap. 

THE  CRUSADE  OF  THE  CHILDREN  IN  THE  Xlllth 
CENTURY.  With  Illustration  and  Appendix.  i2mo, 
£1.50. 

HUSBAND  AND  WIFE.  With  an  Introduction  by  the  Rt. 
Rev.  F.  D.  Huntington.  Revised  Edition.  i6mo,  gilt 
top,  $1.00. 

THE  CHURCH'S  CERTAIN  FAITH.  The  Baldwin  Lec- 
tures, University  of  Michigan.     i2mo,  $1.50. 

HOUGHTON,  MIFFLIN  &  COMPANY, 
Boston  and  New  York. 


SSal&toiu  3tccturc£,  1889 


THE 


CHURCH'S   CERTAIN    FAITH 


BY 


GEORGE   ZABRISKIE   GRAY 

LATE    DEAN    OF   THE    EPISCOPAL  THEOLOGICAL 
SCHOOL,  CAMBRIDGE,  MASS. 


BOSTON   AND    NEW   YORK 

HOUGHTON,   MIFFLIN   AND   COMPANY 

(£fy  iftiurrsior  Press,  tfambriDQe 

1890 


Copyright,  1890, 
Br  KATE   FORREST   GRAY. 

All  rights  reserved. 


The  Riverside  Press,  Cambridge,  Mass.,U.  S.  A. 
Electrotyped  and  Printed  by  II.  O.  Houghton  &  Company. 


NOTE. 


In  the  publication  of  these  Lectures  but  few 
words  seem  necessary  beyond  my  husband's  In- 
troductory Letter. 

When  he  wrote  this  letter,  his  illness  was 
much  more  serious  than  he  imagined,  and  he 
was  suffering  from  a  failure  of  sight,  from  which 
he  never  sufficiently  recovered  to  be  able  to  re- 
vise any  of  the  Lectures.  Nevertheless,  until 
within  three  weeks  of  his  death,  he  confidently 
hoped  to  regain  such  health  and  sight  as  would 
enable  him  to  prepare  them  for  the  press.  As 
now  printed,  a  few  changes  of  form  and  occa- 
sional verbal  corrections  have  been  made,  but' in 
other  respects  the  Lectures  stand  as  my  hus- 
band left  them. 

The  fragmentary  form  of  the  first  Lecture  is 

due  to  the  fact  that  it  was  never  finished,  as  is 

indicated  in  his  letter  to  the  Rector  of  the  Ho- 

bart  Guild.  Kate  Forrest  Gray. 

Cambridge,  Easter,  1890. 


INTRODUCTORY   LETTER 

TO    THE    RECTOR    OF    THE    HOBART   GUILD. 

Cambridge,  April  22,  1889. 
My  dear  Doctor,  —  It  is  one  of  the  great  disap- 
pointments of  my  life,  that  owing  to  illness  I  cannot 
deliver  these  Lectures,  the  preparation  of  which  has 
been  a  labor  of  love  ;  for  although  I  did  not  expect 
they  would  be  equal  to  the  occasion,  I  fully  realized 
the  opportunity  for  good  which  that  occasion  affords. 
But  their  delivery  by  me  being  entirely  out  of   the 
question,  as  I  both  know  and  am  told  by  physicians, 
I  send  them  as  you  request,  that  they  may  be  read 
by  yourself,  or  one  whom  you  appoint.     Yet,  even  in 
so  doing,  there  is  the  further  distress  to  me,  that  I 
have  not  been  able  to  revise  the  work  of  the  type- 
writer, for  I  feel  that  there  must  be  many  things  of 
greater  or  less  importance  which  I  must  leave  to  your 
correction,  especially  in  the  first  Lecture,  which  has 
not  even  received  the  amount  of  labor  bestowed  upon 
the  others,  and  where  I  rely  upon  you,  not  only  to 
correct,  but  also  to  condense,  as  your  judgment  and 
taste  will  indicate.     I  know  of  nothing  of  moment  to 
change  as  to  matter,  but  I  am  aware  that  there  are 
many  things  in  which  criticism  will  call  for  change  as 
to  form.     During  the  summer  I  hope  to  be  able  to 
put  the  Lectures  into  such  shape  for  printing  as  may 
render  them  a  little  worthier  of  their  predecessors. 
Please    state,   by   way   of   introduction,    that   the 


Vi  INTRODUCTORY  LETTER. 

brief  period  allowed  for  preparation,  as  well  as  my 
imperfect  health  this  last  winter,  shut  me  up  to  a 
popular  rather  than  an  erudite  course,  which,  how- 
ever, seemed  to  me,  perhaps,  to  be  the  means  of 
reaching  an  audience,  whom  more  elaborate  dis- 
courses  might  not  help  as  well,  or  which,  if  they 
would,  are  so  amply  provided.  As  to  the  subjects 
chosen,  —  The  Nature  of  Christianity,  the  Reality  of 
Jesus,  His  Deity,  His  Church,  Theology,  and  the 
Bible,  —  they  were  selected  because  they  cover  the 
ground  of  the  great  religious  discussions  of  the  day, 
and  because,  about  all  of  them,  divergences  in  the  re- 
ligious world  are  more  radical  than  is  generally  real- 
ized, in  spite  of  frequent  apparent  agreements.  My 
method  of  treatment,  beyond  the  popularity  of  form, 
has  been  to  try  to  show  how  these  matters  are  looked 
at  in  consistency  with  the  spirit  of  our  own  Church, 
as  it  is  represented  by  those  who  seek  to  rise  above 
parties  and  shibboleths,  and  realize  the  fullness  of 
her  message  and  the  width  of  her  embrace. 

In  other  words,  I  have  tried  to  present  what  I  have 
so  largely  learned  from  Bishop  Harris,  for  I  in- 
tended in  my  Introduction  to  speak  of  him  as  under- 
standing, as  fully  as  any  one  I  have  ever  known,  the 
words  "  I  believe  in  the  Holy  Catholic  Church,"  and 
the  Lectures  were  written  with  a  feeling  that  they 
were  to  be  delivered  under  the  sense  of  the  loss  of 
the 

"  touch  of  a  vanish'd  hand. 


And  the  sound  of  a  voice  that  is  still," 

and  to  constitute   an    humble    contribution    towards 
continuing  the  influence  of  his  magnificent  life. 

I  have   prepared   in   the   rough  an    Introductory 


INTRODUCTORY  LETTER.  vii 

Lecture  upon  various  preliminary  matters,  especially 
the  nature  of  true  Christian  Belief,  as  resting  not 
upon  mere  authority,  nor  the  result  of  argument,  but 
being  the  belief  of  conviction,  based  upon  personal 
perception  of  truth.  I  had  hoped  to  show  how,  by 
emphasizing  this  element,  or  by  "manifestation  of 
the  truth,  commending  ourselves  to  every  man's  con- 
science in  the  sight  of  God,"  is  what  is  needed  in 
dealing  with  the  alleged  prevalent  unbelief  of  the 
day,  in  which  there  is  perhaps  less  unwillingness  to 
believe  than  desire  to  believe  rightly,  and  less  rejec- 
tion of  the  Catholic  faith  than  misapprehension  as  to 
what  it  is. 

Let  me  add,  furthermore,  that  the  limitations  im- 
posed by  the  time  at  my  disposal,  and  by  the  field  in 
view,  have  not  only  led  me  to  say  many  things  which 
will  be  trite  to  many  hearers,  but  have  also  led  me  to 
omit  many  things  which,  under  other  circumstances, 
would  have  been  called  for.  Critical  listeners  will 
notice  not  a  few  significant  silences ;  and  I  desire  to 
say  that  inference  as  to  my  personal  opinions  drawn 
from  such  silences,  will  be  extremely  precarious ;  for 
the  object  of  the  Lectures  is  to  show  the  distinction 
between  what  the  Churchman  is  committed  to,  or 
must  hold,  and  those  things  which,  however  firmly 
convinced  of,  he  is  yet  aware  are  matters  of  private 
conviction. 

With  these  few  prefatory  words,  I  send  to  you 
pages  which  in  any  event  would  have  been  submitted 
with  diffidence  to  the  audience  for  which  they  were 
prepared,  but  which,  in  their  present  condition,  are 
only  forwarded  because  of  your  urgent  request,  in 
view  of  the  importance  of  making  no  break  in  the 


vill  INTRODUCTORY  LETTER. 

series,  and  in  confident  reliance  upon  your  kindness 
and  judgment  to  make  such  changes  and  corrections 
as  may  be  evidently  called  for.  I  sincerely  hope  and 
pray  that  in  this  imperfect  form  they  may  contribute 
something  to  fulfill  the  object  of  the  lectureship  j  and 
when  Providence  restores  to  me  my  strength,  my  first 
labor  shall  be  to  put  them  into  such  form  for  publica- 
tion as  may  be  more  efficient  to  promote  the  aim  of 
the  generous  founder  whose  name  the  foundation 
bears,  and  more  worthy  of  being  associated  with  the 
work  of  the  Hobart  Guild.  George  Z.  Gray. 


EXTRACT    FROM    DEED    OF   FOUNDATION 
OF   THE   BALDWIN   LECTURES. 

"  This  Instrument,  made  and  executed  between 
Samuel  Smith  Harris,  Bishop  of  the  Protestant  Epis- 
copal Church  in  the  Diocese  of  Michigan,  of  the 
city  of  Detroit,  Wayne  County,  Michigan,  as  party 
of  the  first  part,  and  Henry  P.  Baldwin,  Alonzo  B. 
Palmer,  Henry  A.  Hayden,  Sidney  D.  Miller,  and 
Henry  P.  Baldwin,  2d,  of  the  State  of  Michigan, 
Trustees  under  the  trust  created  by  this  instrument, 
as  parties  of  the  second  part,  witnesseth  as  fol- 
lows :  — 

"  In  the  year  of  Our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hun- 
dred and  eighty-five,  the  said  party  of  the  first  part, 
moved  by  the  importance  of  bringing  all  practicable 
Christian  influence  to  bear  upon  the  great  body  of 
students  annually  assembled  at  the  University  of 
Michigan,  undertook  to  promote  and  set  in  operation 
a  plan  of  Christian  work  at  said  University,  and  col- 
lected contributions  for  that  purpose,  of  which  plan 
the  following  outline  is  here  given,  that  is  to  say :  — 

"  1.  To  erect  a  building  or  hall  near  the  University 
in  which  there  should  be  cheerful  parlors,  a  well- 
equipped  reading-room,  and  a  lecture-room  where  the 
lectures  hereinafter  mentioned  might  be  given. 

"  2.  To  endow  a  lectureship  similar  to  the  Bamp- 
ton  Lectureship  in  England,  for  the  Establishment 
and  Defence  of  Christian  Truth ;  the  lectures  on  such 


X        FOUNDATION  OF  BALDWIN  LECTURES. 

foundation  to  be  delivered  annually  at  Ann  Arbor  by 
a  learned  clergyman  or  other  communicant  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  to  be  chosen  as  herein- 
after provided  :  such  lectures  to  be  not  less  than  six 
nor  more  than  eight  in  number,  and  to  be  published 
in  book  form  before  the  income  of  the  fund  shall  be 
paid  to  the  lecturer. 

11  3.  To  endow  two  other  lectureships,  one  on  Bib- 
lical Literature  and  Learning,  and  the  other  on  Chris- 
tian Evidences  :  the  object  of  such  lectureships  to  be 
to  provide  for  all  the  students  who  may  be  willing  to 
avail  themselves  of  them  a  complete  course  of  instruc- 
tian  in  sacred  learning,  and  in  the  philosophy  of  right 
thinking  and  right  living,  without  which  no  education 
can  justly  be  considered  complete. 

"4.  To  organize  a  society,  to  be  composed  of  the 
students  in  all  classes  and  departments  of  the  Uni- 
versity who  may  be  members  of  or  attached  to  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  of  which  society  the 
Bishop  of  the  Diocese,  the  Rector,  Wardens,  and 
Vestrymen  of  St.  Andrew's  Parish,  and  all  the  Pro- 
fessors of  the  University  who  are  communicants  of 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  should  be  members 
ex-officio,  which  society  should  have  the  care  and 
management  of  the  reading-room  and  lecture-room  of 
the  hall,  and  of  all  exercises  or  employments  carried 
on  therein,  and  should  moreover  annually  elect  each 
of  the  lecturers  hereinbefore  mentioned,  upon  the 
nomination  of  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese. 

"  In  pursuance  of  the  said  plan,  the  said  society 
of  students  and  others  has  been  duly  organized  under 
the  name  of  the  '  Hobart  Guild  of  the  University 
of  Michigan  ; '  the  hall   above  mentioned  has  been 


FOUNDATION  OF  BALDWIN  LECTURES.      XI 

builded,  and  called  '  Hobart  Hall ; '  and  Mr.  Henry 
P.  Baldwin,  of  Detroit,  Michigan,  and  Sibyl  A.  Bald- 
win, his  wife,  have  given  to  the  said  party  of  the  first 
part  the  sum  of  ten  thousand  dollars  for  the  endow- 
ment and  support  of  the  lectureship  first  hereinbefore 
mentioned. 

"  Now,  therefore,  I,  the  said  Samuel  Smith  Harris, 
Bishop  as  aforesaid,  do  hereby  give,  grant,  and  trans- 
fer to  the  said  Henry  P.  Baldwin,  Alonzo  B.  Palmer, 
Henry  A.  Hayden,  Sidney  D.  Miller,  and  Henry  P. 
Baldwin,  2d,  Trustees  as  aforesaid,  the  said  sum  of 
ten  thousand  dollars,  to  be  invested  in  good  and  safe 
interest-bearing  securities,  the  net  income  thereof  to 
be  paid  and  applied  from  time  to  time  as  hereinafter 
provided,  the  said  sum  and  the  income  thereof  to  be 
held  in  trust  for  the  following  uses  :  — 

"  1.  The  said  fund  shall  be  known  as  the  Endow- 
ment Fund  of  the  Baldwin  Lectures. 

"2.  There  shall  be  chosen  annually  by  the  Ho- 
bart Guild  of  the  University  of  Michigan,  upon  the 
nomination  of  the  Bishop  of  Michigan,  a  learned  cler- 
gyman or  other  communicant  of  the  Protestant  Epis- 
copal Church,  to  deliver  at  Ann  Arbor,  and  under  the 
auspices  of  the  said  Hobart  Guild,  between  the  Feast 
of  St.  Michael  and  All  Angels  and  the  Feast  of  St. 
Thomas,  in  each  year,  not  less  than  six  nor  more 
than  eight  lectures,  for  the  Establishment  and  De- 
fense of  Christian  Truth;  the  said  lectures  to  be 
published  in  book  form  by  Easter  of  the  following 
year,  and  to  be  entitled  'The  Baldwin  Lectures  ; '  and 
there  shall  be  paid  to  the  said  lecturer  the  income  of 
the  said  endowment  fund,  upon  the  delivery  of  fifty 
copies  of  said  lectures  to  the  said  Trustees  or  their 


xii     FOUNDATION  OF  BALDWIN  LECTURES. 

successors;  the  said  printed  volumes  to  contain,  as 
an  extract  from  this  instrument,  or  in  condensed 
form,  a  statement  of  the  object  and  conditions  of 
this  trust." 


CONTENTS. 

» 

LECTURE   I. 
What  is  Belief  ? i 

LECTURE  II. 
What  is  Christianity? 25 

LECTURE  III. 
Was  Jesus  Christ  an  Historical  Reality  ?    ....    62 

LECTURE  IV. 
Who  was  Jesus  Christ  ? 95 

LECTURE  V. 
What  did  Christ  Found  ? 129 

LECTURE  VI. 
What  is  Theology  ? 166 

LECTURE  VII. 
The  Bible 196 


THE  CHURCH'S  CERTAIN  FAITH 


LECTURE   I. 

WHAT    IS    BELIEF  ? 

"  By  manifestation   of  the  truth,  commending   ourselves   to 
every  man's  conscience  in  the  sight  of  God."  —  2  Cor.  iv.  2. 

It  should  be  clearly  understood  at  the  outset 
that  these  lectures  are  to  be  popular.  It  is  an 
undoubted  fact  that  there  is  among  the  laity 
a  demand  for  a  kind  of  information  that  is  not 
sufficiently  provided.  Books  and  lectures  that 
intend  to  commend  and  set  forth  the  faith  are 
apt  to  be  either  marked  by  a  scholarship  which, 
while  admirable,  is  not  adapted  to  those  un- 
familiar with  theological  study  and  having  little 
opportunity  to  become  so,  or  else  is  unsatisfac- 
tory to  the  intelligent  and  the  thoughtful  reader. 
There  is  wanted  a  class  of  works  that  will  help 
keen  and  reflective  men  and  women,  without  be- 
ing either  technical  and  erudite,  or  dogmatic  and 
pedagogical.  It  is  in  this  line  that  these  lectures 
are  planned,  to  give  to  such  intelligent  and  inde- 
pendent minds  as  those  who  are  addressed,  in  an 
ingenuous  and  sympathetic  manner,  a  statement 


2  WHAT  IS  BELIEF? 

of  what  and  why  we  believe  in  this  Church  of 
our  love  and  our  allegiance. 

The  reason  for  the  selection  of  the  topics 
chosen  for  these  lectures  is  that  they  cover  all 
the  ground  of  controversy  —  are  the  great  ques- 
tions in  issue  in  these  days  when  there  is  so 
much  religious  discussion.  For  this  is  the  char- 
acteristic of  the  mental  activity  of  the  age. 
Some  insist  that  the  interest  in  religion  is  dying 
out,  and  that  Christianity  does  not  occupy  men's 
thoughts  as  it  once  did.  I  should  say  that  this 
was  precisely  the  reverse  of  the  truth.  If  not  a 
very  religious  age,  it  is  at  any  rate  more  inter- 
ested in  religious  questions  than  any  previous 
age  has  ever  been.  Periodicals  and  newspapers 
have  regular  religious  departments.  The  books 
that  sell  are  those  that  turn  upon  such  matters. 
In  fact,  the  writer  of  fiction  who  would  gain  a 
hearing  must  have  some  doctrine  to  preach, 
whether  old  or  new  ;  and  "  art  for  art's  sake  "  no 
longer  seems  to  have  any  disciples  in  this  de- 
partment. Clubs  are  occupied  with  these  themes, 
and  a  religious  discussion  will  insure  a  full  meet- 
ing. Works  on  other  subjects,  on  science  of  all 
sorts,  trench  upon  the  religious  domain,  and  now 
and  then  even  the  mathematician  will  have  his 
say  upon  it.  It  is  true  that  all  questions  must 
somewhere  trench  upon  religion,  but  it  has  been 
reserved  for  our  days  to  see  such  abounding  at- 
tention to  it.  Instead  of  religious  matters  being 
neglected,   people  will  not  let   them  alone  who 


WHAT  IS  BELIEF?  3 

might  sometimes  do  so  to  advantage.  New  isms 
are  springing  up  out  of  the  ferment.  St.  Paul 
said  that  the  Athenians  were  "too  religious," 
but  the  disputatiousness  and  fondness  for  new 
altars  and  original  cults  that  we  see  are  probably 
in  excess  of  what  marked  their  city.  And  so 
it  is  an  age  full  of  encouragement  to  the  be- 
liever. We  can  look  on  and  rejoice  at  all  this 
religious  interest,  for  although  much  of  it  is  hos- 
tile and  much  is  erring,  yet  it  is  an  immense  ad- 
vance upon  the  stagnation  of  a  past  age.  What 
is  wanted  is  that  people  should  think  upon  the 
matters  in  issue,  and  even  if  they  think  wrongly, 
at  any  rate  these  subjects  are  before  them,  and 
there  is  assurance  of  the  triumph  of  the  truth, 
whose  greatest  enemy  is  indifference.  But  be- 
yond this,  as  we  shall  see  later,  much  of  the  dis- 
cussion is  earnest.  It  is  an  earnest  questioning 
of  received  teachings  in  order  to  be  sure  that 
they  are  true.  That  is,  this  spirit  of  questioning 
is  often  a  most  sensible  thing.  To  have  difficul- 
ties of  belief  is  not  all  a  misfortune.  Consider  the 
complicated  theologies  in  which  most  people  are 
brought  up,  the  old  theories  of  Scripture  and  other 
things  imposed  by  their  churches,  the  ancestral 
beliefs  handed  down  by  the  sects  that  exist  but 
to  perpetuate  them,  and  then  answer  whether 
doubt  and  unrest  are  altogether  to  be  regretted  ; 
whether  there  is  not  room  for  still  more  critical 
inquiry  into  much  that  in  popular  religionism 
passes  for  Christian  truth. 


4  WHA  T  IS  BELIEF? 

The  standpoint  whence  these  topics  are  to  be 
treated  is  what  I  understand  to  be  that  of  this 
Church,  or  that  of  a  strong  and  uncompromising 
churchmanship.  This  is  a  matter  not  always 
understood.  It  is  made  often  to  mean  strong 
emphasizing  of  some  particular  features  of  the 
Church,  rather  than  others,  laying  stress  upon 
its  institutions  rather  than  its  comprehensive- 
ness or  catholicity ;  so  changing  its  conception 
as  to  make  it  a  holy  narrow  Church,  with  apos- 
tolic order  and  very  little  room.  Let  us  learn 
to  emphasize  both  its  institutions  and  its  catho- 
licity. Be  it  our  endeavor  to  set  forth  the  idea 
of  Christian  brotherhood  as  at  once  contain- 
ing elements  of  fixity  and  elasticity,  at  once  im- 
movably abiding  by  what  is  essential  to  the  true 
discipleship  of  Christ  and  also  giving  free  play 
within  it  to  all  the  varied  sorts  and  conditions  of 
men  and  minds.  The  idea  of  the  Church  we  as- 
sume and  would  maintain  is  not  that  of  a  vessel 
moored  at  both  ends  and  motionless  in  the  ebb 
and  flow  of  tide,  and  the  change  and  fall  of  winds, 
but  it  is  that  of  a  vessel  anchored  by  that  which 
reaches  down  to  the  very  rock  and  grasps  it 
firmly,  and  yet  swings  and  moves  as  currents 
come  and  go  —  adapts  itself  to  new  conditions  of 
the  restless  waters  about  it.  In  all  this  I  shall 
try  to  speak  as  I  believe  the  noble  Bishop  would 
have  me  speak  to  whose  invitation  these  lectures 
are  due,  and  with  whose  thought  I  was  favored  to 
be  intimately  acquainted,  by  conversations  whose 


WHAT  IS  BELIEF?  5 

memory  will  ever  be  among  the  most  treasured 
recollections  of  my  life.  Not  only  was  it  his 
brilliancy  of  intellect,  his  soundness  of  judgment, 
his  masterly  ability,  his  rare  culture  :  it  was  also 
his  signal  apprehension  of  the  true  character  of 
the  Church,  the  correct  replies  to  the  questions 
we  are  to  treat,  that  rendered  him,  in  the  estima- 
tion of  those  that  knew  him,  one  of  the  foremost 
men  of  our  communion,  a  leader  who  gave  prom- 
ise of  achievements  that  no  one  else  yet  gives. 

In  taking  up  our  first  question,  What  is  belief  ? 
it  may  be  well  to  approach  it  by  considering  the 
state  of  men's  minds  on  the  subject,  and  certain 
confusions  of  thought  that  are  prevalent. 

The  religious  condition  of  the  age  is  much  dis- 
cussed ;  and  we  hear  much  that  is  despondent 
from  those  that  believe,  and  exultant  from  those 
that  do  not.  One's  generalizations  are  apt  to  be 
affected  by  his  surroundings,  for  we  are  all  prone 
to  confine  ourselves  to  our  own  horizons.  It 
is  important  neither  to  exaggerate  nor  to  mini- 
mize the  spread  of  unbelief.  Let  us  notice  one 
or  two  points  that  can  safely  be  made. 

In  the  first  place  it  is  hardly  wise  to  affirm 
that  there  is  a  decline  of  faith,  in  the  sense  of 
belief  in  things  unseen  and  forms  invisible.  On 
the  contrary,  there  never  was  so  much  of  it  since 
the  world  began.  Instead  of  faith  wanting,  it  is 
wisdom.  We  see  everywhere  its  exaggerations, 
in  the  scenes  at  Lourdes,  in  faith  cures,  in  mock 
sciences  based  upon  it,  in  isms  that  are  enough 


6  WHAT  IS  BELIEF? 

to  drive  sensible  people  to  despair  and  make  the 
scientific  man  feel  his  mission  a  failure.  We 
sometimes  hear  of  "  the  Ages  of  Faith  "  as  de- 
parted never  to  return  ;  some  rejoicing,  others 
mourning,  that  they  are  vanished.  Nevertheless 
they  are  coming  back  in  aggravated  form,  and  in- 
stead of  too  little  there  is  too  much  faith,  and  not 
enough  reason  ;  and  whereas  there  is  a  regretta- 
ble amount  of  materialism  that  is  formulated,  and 
more  that  is  practical,  yet  this  is  not  a  danger 
that  threatens  us  as  much  as  a  soul-destroying 
spiritualism.  For  it  is  not  true,  as  some  seem 
to  think,  that  the  mere  belief  that  there  are  un- 
seen realities  has  a  saving  or  a  purifying  power. 

But  how  is  it  as  to  Christianity  ?  Is  not  that 
waning  ?  The  really  striking  fact  in  the  case  is 
the  slight  degree  to  which  its  hold  upon  human 
hearts  is  affected  by  the  changes  and  the  assaults 
that  these  times  are  bringing.  There  is  so  much 
strength  in  the  attacks  that  are  made,  so  much 
eloquence,  so  much  that  is  true  even  in  what  the 
opponents  say,  so  much  in  the  conditions  of  life 
to  aid  their  endeavors,  that  it  is  a  wonder  they 
have  not  more  success  than  they  have.  But 
the  numbers  of  recorded  worshipers  and  com- 
municants are  unprecedented,  the  statistics  of 
expenditure  for  Christian  purposes,  of  gifts  for 
missions  and  charities,  are  beyond  all  in  the  past. 
This  is  clearly  seen  also  by  the  perusal  of  such 
books  as  cast  light  upon  the  matter  in  the  gen- 
erations that  are  gone,  the  last  century  and  those 


WHAT  IS  BELIEF?  J 

preceding.  It  would  seem  rash  to  affirm  that  at 
any  date  there  has  ever  been  so  large  a  popula- 
tion in  this  or  any  other  land  professing  Chris- 
tianity as  there  is  to-day ;  and  it  is  equally  verifia- 
ble that  this  increase  is  greatest  among  the  most 
intelligent  peoples  and  the  most  cultured  'indi- 
viduals. But  to  these  add  those  who  make  no 
profession,  but  are  living  by  faith  in  Christ.  It 
is  a  great  mistake  to  imagine,  as  both  friends 
and  foes  are  apt  to  do,  that  all  Christian  belief 
is  included  in  the  church-going  part  of  the  com- 
munity. It  ought  to  be  so,  but  it  is  not.  Out- 
side of  the  pews  there  is  a  vast  amount  of  trust 
in  Christ  and  of  following  Him  in  life,  of  bearing 
trial  because  of  the  strength  He  gives  and  the 
hopes  He  awakens,  and  of  doing  good  and  bear- 
ing burdens  in  a  spirit  learned  of  Him.  The  in- 
fidel must  not  sing  his  song  of  victory  over  the 
decay  of  Christianity,  nor  the  believer  give  way 
to  lamentations,  until  this  large  element  of  un- 
demonstrative faith  has  been  added  to  that  which 
statistics  embrace.  Then  the  former  may  mod- 
erate his  paeans  and  the  latter  his  regrets. 

But  is  there  no  extensive  decay  of  belief  in 
Christ  ?  no  giving  up  the  gospel  ?  Yes,  there  is 
a  sad  amount  of  it ;  a  strange  reverting  to  hea- 
thenism is  often  noticeable.  Some  people  may 
be  shocked  by  this  name  for  it.  But  what  is  hea- 
thenism ?  It  is  merely  living  without  the  gospel, 
religion  without  belief  in  God's  answers  to  a 
world's  needs.     If  one  has  given  this  up,  he  is  a 


8  WHAT  IS  BELIEF? 

heathen,  be  it  of  the  materialistic  or  more  ele- 
vated and  spiritual  kind,  and  it  is  difficult  to  see 
why  he  should  object  to  the  name  that  describes 
him  in  this  respect.  And  it  is  very  amazing  to 
see  men  and  women  in  this  nineteenth  century, 
who  have  been  blest  by  Christianity  in  their 
homes,  their  social  life,  in  all  that  renders  their 
lot  different  from  that  of  skin-clad  ancestors,  giv- 
ing up  all  that  marks  them  as  favored  beyond 
the  nations  that  sit  in  darkness,  and  going  back 
to  live  and  educate  their  children,  or  trying  to 
do  so,  in  a  way  that  was  given  up  ages  ago  by 
their  fathers  as  an  intolerable  thing,  so  soon  as 
the  light  of  Jesus  came  to  them.  Think  of  the 
enormity,  the  absurdity,  of  a  citizen  of  a  land 
like  this,  founded  by  Christians,  made  what  it  is, 
perhaps  more  than  any  other  land,  by  Christian- 
ity, becoming  a  heathen  again  !  But  while  there 
is  much  of  this  real  abandonment  of  the  gospel, 
there  is  not  so  much  as  some  think.  The  whole 
question  is  one  of  proportion,  and  while  we  can- 
not have  statistics  of  mental  conditions,  yet  all 
available  indicate  clearly  that  there  never  was  so 
small  a  proportion  of  intelligent  men  and  women 
who  really  disbelieved  the  essence  of  Christianity. 
The  fact  is  that  what  unbelief  there  is  now  is 
more  outspoken.  There  is  a  liberty  now  to  say 
things  once  forbidden  or  discountenanced  ;  and 
we  must  be  very  careful  not  to  conclude  that  be- 
cause more  people  say  they  give  up  faith,  there- 
fore more  have  really  done  so  than  was  the  case 
in  other  days. 


WHAT  IS  BELIEF?  9 

But  this  leads  us  to  ask  what  are  really  the  sig- 
nificance and  weight  of  the  apparent  doubt  of 
the  day  ;  for  there  is  much  that  claims  to  be,  and 
is,  both  questioning  and  denial  of  Christian  be- 
liefs. We  may  consider  this  with  reference  to 
the  matters  questioned,  or  with  reference  to  the 
spirit  of  the  questioners. 

Much  that  passes  for  doubt  and  causes  regret 
is  really  of  no  serious  consequence,  and  does 
not  affect  essential  Christian  faith.  This  is  seen 
when  we  divide  the  matters  questioned  into 
those  for  which  Christianity  is  not  responsible 
and  those  to  which  it  is  committed. 

Among  the  former  are  tenets  which  are  held 
by  this  or  that  sect,  or  which  are  widely  preva- 
lent without  any  definite  home.  The  Christian 
Church,  the  brotherhood  of  believers,  is  not  to 
stand  or  fall  with  any  of  these.  We  are  so  sur- 
rounded by  the  atmosphere  of  sectarianism  that 
it  is  hard  for  most  people  to  realize  that  they  can 
question  a  great  deal  that  is  insisted  upon  by 
many  people  without  touching  Christianity ;  that 
much  which  is  the  corner-stone  of  popular  reli- 
gionism, many  points  that  bodies  about  us  make 
identical  with  the  gospel,  "  the  mark  of  a  stand- 
ing or  a  falling  church,"  are  simply  the  particu- 
lar notions  of  individuals  or  sects,  and  as  much 
subject  to  approval  or  rejection  as  any  other 
opinion.  It  were  well  to  do  a  little  more  ques- 
tioning as  to  the  tenets  of  recent  and  erratic 
sects,   or  even  to  question  the  capacity  of  any 


IO  117/ AT  IS  BELIEF? 

founders  of  larger  and  older  ones  to  lay  down 
final  tests  of  correct  belief ;  to  criticise  keenly 
any  addition  to  the  simplest  statement  of  the 
gospel.  Such  things,  for  instance,  as  doctrines 
of  predestination,  and  theories  of  eternal  punish- 
ment, and  explanatory  dogmas  about  the  atone- 
ment, and  this  or  that  man's  assertions  about  the 
Bible,  are  as  open  to  criticism  as  any  teaching  of 
a  professor  in  his  chair.  The  Church  of  Christ, 
Christianity,  is  not  committed  to  any  school  of 
opinion  upon  these  subjects,  and  he  who  accepts 
the  catholic  creeds  may  doubt  all  the  theories 
and  explanations  of  them  and  yet  be  entitled  to 
every  privilege  and  every  hope  of  the  believer. 
It  is  time  that  assailants  as  well  as  defenders 
learned  that  Christianity  is  not  concerned,  its 
issues  are  not  at  stake,  its  claims  are  not  im- 
periled, in  the  attack  upon  any  tenet  or  belief 
that  is  but  the  shibboleth  of  some  one  or  more 
bodies  in  the  land.  The  overthrow  of  such  things 
may  destroy  sects,  or  cut  the  ground  from  under 
preachers  of  such  ideas ;  but  the  gospel  is  not 
touched,  reasons  for  believing  it  are  not  weak- 
ened, the  Church's  voice  is  not  discredited,  until 
some  one  point  on  which  the  Church  is  commit- 
ted in  its  apostolic  faith  is  overthrown.  Learn 
then  not  to  be  anxious  about  the  rejection  of,  nor 
to  fight  for  as  essential,  any  article  of  belief  that 
marks  any  fragment,  or  any  local  or  transient 
organization,  of  Christendom. 

As  to  doubt  upon   matters  to  which  Christian- 


WHAT  IS  BELIEF?  II 

ity  is  really  committed,  to  say  that  there  are  two 
different  sorts  of  doubt  is  not  a  subtle  refining  of 
distinctions,  but  is  only  to  say  what  every  obser- 
ver has  noticed.     Often  what  is  doubted  is  not 
the  thing  itself,  but  some  misapprehension  of  it. 
This  misapprehension  may  be  due  to  mistaking 
the  sense  of  terms  or  of  dogmas  because  of  in- 
sufficient information,  or  because  of  the  way  in 
which  they  have  been  interpreted  by  bodies  of 
Christians  or  by  individuals  of  influence.     This 
may  lead  to  conceptions  of  truths  that  ought  to 
be   rejected,   out  of  respect  to  the  faith   itself. 
For  instance,  when  an  eminent  divine  so  teaches 
the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  that  others  could  not, 
and  he  said  he  hardly  could,  distinguish  it  from 
the  idea  of  three  Gods,  the  man  who  knows  no 
better  statement   of  it  must  deny  it ;  or,   when 
one  is  taught  that   the  inspiration  of  the  Bible 
means  mechanical  dictation  to  its  writers,  he  may 
well  say  that  if  that  is  what  it  actually  means  he 
cannot  believe  it.     In  either  case  a  man  is  not 
doubting  anything  that  Christianity  is  committed 
to,  but  only  what  ill-advised  persons  have  imputed 
to  it.     The  true  way,  then,  is  for  him  to  ascertain 
just  what  the  dogma  meant  to  those  who  framed 
it,  or  the  word  to  those  who  adopted  it ;  what  is 
meant  now  by  the  wise  and  true  representatives 
of  the  faith  ;  what  is  intended  to  be  affirmed,  and 
what  is  not,  in  the  creeds  of  Christendom.     This 
will  put  an  aspect  so  entirely  different  upon  the 
matter,  that,  it  is  safe  to  say,  few  of  the  apparent 


12  WHAT  IS  BELIEF? 

deniers  of  the  Christian  creeds  really  impugn 
what  the  Catholic  Church  meant  to  affirm  by 
their  most  disputed  assertions.  One  of  the  most 
difficult  things  in  controversy  is  to  get  a  plain, 
clear  issue.  Too  frequently,  the  assailant  and 
the  defender  have  different  things  in  mind,  be- 
cause of  this  prevalence  of  misapprehension,  and 
the  cause  of  truth  is  imperiled  by  the  defender's 
accepting  the  issue  as  made  up  by  the  assailant, 
and  assenting  to  his  definition  of  a  doctrine  as 
the  true  statement  of  it  :  the  refutation  of  which 
leaves  the  real  question  untouched,  though  it 
scores  an  apparent  victory  for  the  enemy. 

All  this  might  be  amplified ;  but  what  has 
been  said  will  suffice  to  show  that  actual  doubt 
of  the  faith  is  seen  to  be  much  less  than  some 
suppose,  by  deducting  doubt  of  matters  that  any 
one  is  at  liberty  to  deny,  and  criticism  of  state- 
ments that  do  not  correctly  express  the  teaching 
of  the  Church  or  the  Bible,  and  therefore  ought 
to  be  denied  in  justice  to  those  teachings  them- 
selves. This  is  the  real  reason  of  that  calmness 
with  which  many  regard  much  of  the  seeming 
doubt  and  much  of  the  active  repudiation  of  so- 
called  orthodoxy,  which  others,  nurtured  upon 
shibboleths  and  bred  in  one-sided  conceptions, 
regard  as  indifference  to  truth.  Such  persons 
know  that  in  many  cases  that  to  which  Christian- 
ity is  committed,  the  actual  doctrines  of  the  gos- 
pel, are  either  not  doubted  or  not  involved  in  the 
issues  so  hotly  discussed.     Real  unbelief  begins, 


WHAT  IS  BELIEF?  13 

and  only  begins,  when  some  positive  affirmation, 
which  is  truly  a  part  of  the  faith  once  delivered, 
is  intelligently  and  intentionally  traversed. 

But  it  is  more  germane  to  our  object  at  present 
to  consider  the  spirit  of  the  questioning.  It  is 
true  that  in  many  minds  it  springs  from  a  spirit 
of  unbelief,  from  a  love  of  destructiveness,  or  a 
pride  that  will  not  admit  any  source  of  wisdom 
or  of  help  greater  than  themselves.  How  much 
of  this  there  is  cannot  of  course  be  estimated, 
but  it  is  rash  to  say  that  there  is  as  much  as  some 
allege.  Much  that  is  attributed  to  such  a  spirit 
is  known  not  to  be  due  to  it  by  those  who  are 
acquainted  with  the  facts.  They  whose  doubts 
are  really  due  to  it  cannot  be  argued  with  :  they 
are  to  be  appealed  to,  and  their  heart,  their  con- 
science, their  religious  sense  aroused,  in  order 
that  they  may  realize  that  their  attitude  is  wrong 
and  not  one  in  which  serious  issues  can  be  dealt 
with.  It  is  useless  to  argue  about  religious  mat- 
ters with  those  who  are  not  in  an  earnest,  reli- 
gious state  of  mind.  All  argument  must  be  con- 
fined to  those  sufficiently  awake  to  the  matter  to 
heed  what  is  said  and  sufficiently  aware  of  their 
limitations  to  be  willing  to  be  humble  and  recep- 
tive in  spirit  ;  and  this  is  the  condition  of  most 
of  those,  in  all  probability,  who  are  questioning 
the  truths  of  Christianity  to-day,  at  any  rate  of 
the  candid  ones,  those  whom  we  meet  and  whom 
we  know  and  respect.  They  form  a  large  class 
of  the  community  and  are  more  or  less  outspoken 


14  WHAT  IS  BELIEF? 

in  their  dissent,  and  we  may  learn  much  from 
them.  They  are  not  skeptics  in  spirit :  they  are 
willing  to  believe  what  they  ought  to  believe. 
They  only  want  to  be  sure  that  they  believe 
rightly,  to  have  their  beliefs  accord  with  their 
convictions.  This  is  itself  a  healthy  state  of 
mind.  Such  men  by  their  position  teach  us  the 
nature  of  belief,  cast  light  upon  what  real  faith  is. 

There  are  two  kinds  of  mental  attitude  that 
are  called  faith,  which  are  widely  different,  and 
denote  different  worlds  of  experience  and  life. 

One  is  believing  a  thing  or  a  proposition  be- 
cause it  is  told  us  upon  some  authority  claimed 
to  be  adequate  for  the  purpose.  This  is  believ- 
ing upon  authority ;  and  it  has  been  the  position 
generally  held  in  the  past  and  widely  urged  now, 
and  all  that  even  in  some  wise  and  apparently 
thoughtful  minds  is  meant,  and  deemed  possible, 
in  matters  of  religion. 

The  other  is  the  position  of  many  earnest  men 
who  conceive  that  the  day  for  that  is  gone.  It 
may  have  been  good  and  necessary  once,  it  may 
be  so  for  the  young  and  ignorant  now,  but  for 
thoughtful,  inquiring  minds  it  is  not  satisfactory. 
They  wish  to  see  for  themselves,  not  merely 
receive  reports  of  what  others  see,  in  issues 
so  supremely  important  as  those  here  at  stake. 
Whether  this  position  is  reasonable  or  not,  it  is 
in  fact  one  that  is  taken  by  many  people,  and  by 
most  of  that  class  that  we  want  to  reach,  because 
they  are  the  influential  and   moulding  minds  of 


WHAT  IS  BELIEF?  1 5 

the  day  in  any  community.  Such  people  must 
be  dealt  with  in  some  way.  It  is  idle  to  say  that 
they  are  flippant,  or  skeptical,  or  self-sufficient, 
for  it  is  not  of  those  that  we  are  speaking.  On 
the  contrary,  they  are  those  who  have  in  them 
the  making  of  the  most  valuable  and  efficient  be- 
lievers. 

Again,  we  are  told  that  to  insist  upon  faith 
resting  on  any  external  authority  is  making  skep- 
tics and  infidels  by  the  multitude.  They  who  are 
not  satisfied  with  the  authority  will  contend  that 
if  our  faith  only  rests  upon  it,  then  it  has  no 
claims  on  them.  Or,  others  will  say  that  if  we 
have  no  reason  to  give  for  our  beliefs,  save  that 
others  teach  them,  we  give  up  the  case  and  do 
not  claim  that  they  are  true,  but  only  that  they 
are  to  us  sufficiently  attested,  which  is  a  very  dif- 
ferent thing,  and  means  that  there  is  no  certi- 
tude in  religious  matters,  only  probability,  since 
all  our  confidence  in  authority  is  only  a  question 
of  probability. 

There  must  be  more  than  this.  There  must 
surely  be  certitude ;  assurance  must  be  attain- 
able. The  Church  must  meet  this  issue,  must 
show  that  Christian  faith  can  be  certain  to  the 
man  who  has  it,  and  so  must  have  some  reply  to 
those  who  say  that  authority  is  always  open  to 
question.  If  the  statement  that  two  and  two 
make  four,  or  that  stealing  is  wrong,  or  that  there 
is  reward  for  piety,  only  rests  upon  authority 
of  some  sort,  then  either  proposition  is  far  from 


1 6  WHAT  IS  BELIEF? 

being  a  thing  above  doubt  to  a  candid  and  think- 
ing man. 

An  esteemed  clergyman  was  once  heard  to  say 
that  there  are  so  many  difficulties  about  Chris- 
tianity and  so  many  cogent  arguments  on  either 
side  that  he  only  believed  in  its  doctrines  because 
the  Church  brought  them  to  him.  Of  course, 
this  man  did  not  believe  them  true  at  all.  He 
accepted  them,  submitted  to  the  authority  that 
imposed  them,  would  not  contradict  them  ;  but 
he  could  not  say  that  he  was  sure  of  them,  knew 
them  true.  He  was  through  and  through  a  skep- 
tic, without  faith.  If  this  really  represented  his 
state  of  mind,  (as  indeed  it  did  not,)  then  he  was 
not  leaning  on  the  gospel  he  preached,  but  on  the 
Church.  That  is,  there  is  no  real  belief  in  such 
a  case.  One  who  believes  upon  authority  be- 
lieves only  the  authority.  He  does  not  believe 
the  thing  itself  to  be  true.  The  former  may  be 
safe,  it  may  be  a  state  of  mind  fruitful  of  good 
results,  but  it  is  not  faith.  Faith  means  the 
heart's  assent  to  the  truth  itself. 

True  belief  is  believing  for  ourselves,  seeing 
for  ourselves  that  a  thing  is  true,  assenting  to  it 
because  we  know  it  to  be  so,  not  because  others 
affirm  it,  whoever  they  may  be.  This  is  assur- 
ance, certainty,  which  we  must  have  to  find  any 
help  in  our  faith,  any  comfort  in  our  trust.  It 
is  the  faith  of  conviction  as  distinct  from  the 
faith  of  assent.  It  is  the  only  kind  that  has  ever 
done  real  work  in  the  world  ;  the  kind  that  has 


WHAT  IS  BELIEF?  1/ 

made  martyrs,  that  has  rendered  men  immovable 
by  temptation,  or  persecution,  or  argument.  It 
is  the  kind  that  Christ  sought  to  awaken,  when 
He  taught  the  disciples  that  in  Him  they  might 
have  peace,  or  when  He  promised  the  light  of 
life  to  those  that  believe  in  Him.  It  was  St. 
Paul's  faith  when  he  said  :  "  I  know  Him  whom  I 
have  believed,"  or  when  he  compares  his  hope  to 
"  an  anchor  which  entereth  into  that  within  the 
veil." 

But  why  argue,  that  the  only  faith  that  is 
actual  and  really  deserves  the  name,  the  only  one 
that  can  be  a  source  of  confidence,  the  only  one 
that  should  be  satisfactory  to  the  Church,  the 
one  that  should  be  aimed  at,  is  that  which  is 
believing  a  thing  for  one's  self,  accepting  any 
verity  because  it  is  seen  to  be  a  verity  ?  Because 
this  spirit,  which  marks  the  sincere  questioning 
of  the  day,  and  is  the  state  of  mind  of  many  who 
hold  aloof  from  the  ordinances  of  Christianity,  is 
one  to  be  encouraged,  whose  demand  is  to  be 
met  as  reasonable  and  right.  Such  faith  is  more 
than  a  reasonable  faith,  which  means  a  faith  for 
which  reasons  can  be  given,  and  which,  in  real- 
ity, is  not  faith  :  it  is  persuasion  by  urgent  con- 
siderations. True  faith  is  believing,  not  because 
of  persuasive  arguments,  nor  because  one  cannot 
escape  the  conclusion,  nor  because  our  minds  are 
overpowered  by  what  others  adduce,  but  believing 
because  one  sees  that  the  thing  believed  is  true, 
apart  from  reasoning,  by  direct  perception  which 


1 8  WHAT  IS  BELIEF? 

leaves  no  doubt.  It  is  like  belief  in  the  sunshine, 
which  is  a  matter,  not  of  reasons  for  believing  it, 
but  of  personal,  immediate  vision.  It  is  being 
conscious  of  it,  not  persuaded  that  it  exists. 

This,  then,  is  the  kind  of  faith  that  we  may  and 
should  have,  that  of  personal  assurance,  of  im- 
mediate conviction.  We  are  entitled  to  demand 
that  anything  we  are  asked  to  believe  shall  be  seen 
to  be  true,  but  we  are  bound  to  accept  what  is  so 
seen.  That  is,  when  any  one  asks  us  to  believe 
a  thing,  he  may  be  expected  to  show  that  we 
ought  to  believe  it,  because  it  is  perceptibly  true  ; 
and  we  are  bound  to  do  so  if  it  so  appears,  whether 
we  can  explain  it  or  not. 

Why  are  we  so  bound  ?  Because  we  have  a 
capacity  for  religious  and  moral  truth,  are  not 
unable  to  discriminate  between  it  and  error,  al- 
though of  course  not  always  with  the  same  cer- 
tainty. We  all  claim  it,  all  day  long.  When  a 
man  says  I  will  not  believe  this,  or  I  maintain 
that  against  all  argument,  what  does  it  mean  but 
that  he  knows  he  can  tell  right  from  wrong,  truth 
from  error  ?  Every  revolt  against  authority, 
whether  justified  or  not,  every  positive  affirma- 
tion, implies  it.  It  is  the  basis  of  all  argument. 
When  we  reason  with  a  man,  we  know  we  cannot 
force  him  to  a  conclusion.  We  try  to  make  him 
see  what  we  are  maintaining,  presuming  that  he 
can  see  truth  if  we  can  put  it  rightly.  All  life 
and  intercourse  move  on  this  basis.  The  only 
reason  for  blaming  one  for  anything  wrong  is 


WHAT  IS  BELIEF?  19 

that  he  could  know  what  is  right.  We  act  upon 
it  every  day,  assume  it  in  our  own  conduct  and 
in  our  relations  with  others.  So  we  claim  for  our- 
selves the  power  to  see  what  is  true,  and  we  de- 
mand of  others  that  they  do  so. 

Can  any  one,  it  is  asked,  actually  discern  all 
truth  when  presented  to  him  ?  Is  the  statement 
absolute  ?  No,  it  is,  as  with  anything  else,  a 
matter  of  development  and  growth.  We  do  not 
expect  a  child  to  see  the  truth  of  many  a  matter 
that  older  persons  are  expected  to  discern,  in 
morals,  or  in  duty,  or  in  logic.  So  in  the  dis- 
cernment of  spiritual  things :  in  measure  as  one 
is  spiritually  alive  and  mature  in  intelligence  he 
can  see  what  is  error,  and  what  is  verity,  in 
things  spiritual.  We  do  not  expect  the  gross 
man  whose  higher  nature  is  dead  or  torpid  to 
perceive  what  others  perceive.  We  do  expect 
those  who  are  developed  in  that  nature  to  per- 
ceive, and  follow,  and  accept  truth,  in  the  higher 
realms.  We  all  agree  that  this  power  of  percep- 
tion, or  of  discrimination,  is  a  thing  that  can  and 
should  be  and  is  progressive  in  the  world  and  in 
individuals.  It  follows  that  if  any  one  were  spir- 
itually perfect,  if  his  eyes  were  cleansed  and  his 
heart  purified,  he  could  always  discriminate  be- 
tween truth  and  error ;  and  this  is  our  hope  in 
the  life  to  come,  where  there  will  be  no  delusions 
because  there  will  be  no  blinded  sight.  Not  that 
we  can  see  it  except  as  shown  to  us.  God  must 
always  be  revealed.     No  man  can  by  searching 


20  WHA  T  IS  BELIEF? 

find  Him  out.  But  what  we  do  and  must  expect 
is  that  we  shall  be  able  to  recognize  His  verities 
when  presented,  and  to  see  that  what  is  said  to 
us  is  true  not  only  because  He  makes  it  known, 
but  true  of  and  in  itself.  So  as  we  advance  in 
spirituality  here  below  we  can  see  more  and  more 
by  direct  vision  ;  can  have  the  faith,  not  of  testi- 
mony, but  of  personal  perception.  This  alone  is 
faith  in  the  truth,  as  distinct  from  faith  in  the 
witness  to  it. 

Christ  always  claims  this  faith,  and  asserts  this 
capacity  in  us,  as  regards  His  gospel.  He  does 
not  argue,  or  give  reasons  why  we  should  believe 
what  He  says.  Nor  does  He  impose  it  upon  us 
to  be  received  simply  because  He  says  it.  He 
says  over  and  over  again  such  things  as  this  : 
"  He  that  is  of  the  truth  heareth  my  voice."  He 
says  not,  "Ye  must  believe  what  I  say,"  but 
always  implies  that  we  ought  to  believe  it  be- 
cause we  can  see  that  it  is  true.  He  appeals  to 
men,  does  not  use  syllogisms  nor  coercion,  sim- 
ply takes  for  granted  their  capacity  for  immedi- 
ate perception  and  conviction,  and  expects  them 
to  exercise  it,  and  to  believe  and  confess  that 
He  is  "  the  truth,  the  way,  and  the  life."  So  did 
all  the  apostles,  notably  St.  Paul.  He  does  not 
argue  for  Christ's  gospel,  though  he  may  reason 
cut  its  implications  and  inferences.  He  simply 
presents  truth  and  expects  it  to  be  received,  ap- 
peals to  the  consciences  of  men  to  follow  what 
he  assumes  they  can  know  is  to  be  followed.    He 


WHAT  IS  BELIEF?  21 

asserts  this  faith  of  conviction  as  distinct  from 
that  of  authority,  as  being  the  only  true  faith 
and  the  one  alone  worthy  of  Christians,  in  such 
passages  as  these :  "  Spiritual  things  are  spirit- 
ually discerned;"  we  endure  "as  seeing  Him 
who  is  invisible ;  "  and  above  all  in  the  precept 
set  forth  in  our  text :  "  By  manifestation  of  the 
truth  commending  ourselves  to  every  man's  con- 
science in  the  sight  of  God."  This  shows  the 
position  of  an  inspired  man,  which  ought  to  set- 
tle the  matter  for  the  believer  and  for  the  unbe- 
liever, that  we  are  asked  to  believe  only  what  is 
shown  to  be  true.  This  was  St.  Paul's  principle 
of  preaching,  not  arguing  for  the  truth  by  pro- 
cesses of  logic  which  may  convince  the  intellect, 
nor  requiring  its  acceptance  because  of  the  over- 
whelming weight  of  authority,  but  simply  mani- 
festing, making  plain,  the  truth,  and  thus  expect- 
ing that  men  would  accept  it  because  able  to 
recognize  it  to  be  true.  Thus  he  preached,  and 
so  did  the  early  Church.  Those  were  times 
when  no  one  cared  for  his  or  the  Church's  au- 
thority;  just  as  with  Christ,  who  spoke  to  those 
who  knew  not,  or  cared  not,  that  He  was  the 
Son  of  God ;  and  in  those  times  the  gospel  had 
simply  to  go  upon  its  own  merits,  had  no  power 
except  the  power  of  truth  recognizable  by  men. 
So  has  it  been  ever  since.  Whatever  good  has 
been  done  by  authority,  and  this  good  we  do  not 
deny,  all  the  real  converting  work  of  the  Church 
has  been  done  by  making  men    know  and  see 


22  WHAT  IS  BELIEF? 

the  salvation  that  is  in  Christ,  by  presenting  the 
gospel  to  them  ;  which  has  awakened  that  faith 
that  has  been  immovable  by  temptation  or  by 
trial,  because  the  faith  of  knowledge,  not  of  tes- 
timony. How  much  more  should  we  expect  this 
to  be  the  case  now,  when  all  about  us  have  had 
their  eyes  open  to  visions  which  the  heathen  had 
not,  have  in  some  measure  the  mind  of  Christ, 
and  so  possess  a  capacity  to  discern  what  is  bind- 
ing upon  conscience,  what  is  true  of  God,  and 
of  His  dealings  ;  which  warrants  us  in  expecting 
their  assent  to  the  gospel  even  more  readily  than 
in  other  days  and  other  lands. 

To  those  who  say,  as  some  do,  that  it  is  un- 
safe to  leave  it  to  mankind  to  accept  the  truth  of 
the  gospel  as  they  shall  see  it  true,  we  answer 
that  it  is  of  the  very  essence  of  skepticism  to 
affirm  this.  Are  we  not  to  believe  in  the  power 
of  truth,  and  of  truth  in  Christ,  to  carry  convic- 
tion ?  We  had  supposed  it  was  the  power  of 
missions  and  the  encouragement  of  our  preach- 
ing, that,  when  properly  presented,  men  would 
see  that  Christianity  is  what  they  want,  what 
meets  their  needs,  what  lays  hold  of  their  hearts 
and  claims  the  assent  of  their  consciences.  We 
had  supposed  that  it  was  so  welcome,  so  direct  a 
response  to  the  appeals  of  men,  that  when  con- 
cerned in  religious  matters  they  who  hear  would 
at  once  say  that  they  knew  it  true  and  would 
cast  their  all  upon  it.  And  so  it  is.  The  prac- 
tice of  Christ  and  of  the  apostles  in  their  preach- 


WIIA  T  IS  BELIEF?  2$ 

ing,  all  the  experience  of  centuries,  our  own  ex- 
perience, our  confidence  in  the  truth  of  God, 
agree  to  repudiate  the  unbelieving  and  skeptical 
affirmation  that  the  gospel  of  the  Son  of  God 
needs  argument  and  authority  to  secure  its  ac- 
ceptance. It  only  needs  statement  of  its  glories 
and  precious  truths  and  appeals  to  conscience,  to 
be  accepted.  This  is  the  way  in  which  we  who 
believe  have  been  won  from  our  unbelief.  This 
is  the  way  in  which  those  are  asked  to  come  to 
Christ  who  may  not  have  done  so.  When  and 
if  they  care  for  a  gospel  from  God,  they  will  see 
that  this  is  it,  and  that  it  is  real.  No  man  who 
has  known  Christ  by  direct  vision  and  relation- 
ship will  give  Him  up.  Any  man  is  liable  to  give 
Him  up  who  only  knows  that  some  one  else  tes- 
tifies to  Him. 

It  will  be  said  that  this  does  not  produce  agree- 
ment, and  that  there  will  be  endless  divergence  if 
men  are  left  to  their  conscience,  and  if  they  are 
urged  to  believe  because  and  when  they  see  the 
truth.  Has  the  method  of  presenting  the  faith 
by  arguing  for  it  been  successful  in  this  respect  ? 
No  one  will  maintain  that  it  has.  And  as  to  au- 
thority, if  anything  is  written  large  upon  the 
page  of  history,  it  is  that  this  has  not  succeeded 
in  producing  agreement.  The  effort  to  produce 
it  has  resulted  in  disagreement,  and  rebellion, 
and  schisms,  all  through  the  ages.  There  has 
been  no  more  disastrous  failure  in  the  past  than 
such  an  attempt.     There  is  none  now.    Men  will 


24  WHA  T  IS  BELIEF? 

not  submit  to  dictation  when  intelligent,  or  when 
they  do,  it  is  only  up  to  a  certain  point.  But  on 
the  other  hand  there  has  been  agreement  on  the 
basis  of  appealing  to  the  spiritual  manhood,  the 
consciences  of  men.  Despite  the  divisions  and 
antagonisms  of  the  past,  it  is  one  of  the  wonders 
of  religious  history  that  real  Christians  have 
been  substantially  agreed  in  what  their  hearts 
have  accepted. 

About  the  essence  of  Christianity,  the  nature 
of  Christ,  the  nature  of  His  work,  the  agency  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  the  whole  creed  of  Christendom, 
there  has  been  unity  :  not  because  of  any  author- 
ity, since  it  has  been  among  those  often  sun- 
dered, but  because  all  have  seen  those  things  to 
be  true  by  the  eye  of  their  spiritual  sense.  The 
history  of  Christianity  is  sufficient  evidence  of 
the  fact  that  if  left  to  themselves,  if  properly 
taught  or  shown  the  gospel  truth,  Christian  peo- 
ple would  come  to  agreement  in  as  far  as  they 
were  willing  to  follow  their  lights  ;  and  if  not  an 
organic  unity,  at  any  rate  an  agreement  in  be- 
lief such  as  has  never  yet  been  effected  by  any 
reasoning  about  doctrines  or  enforcing  them  by 
authority. 


LECTURE   II. 

WHAT    IS    CHRISTIANITY  ? 

"  I  declare  unto  you  the  gospel  which  I  preached  unto  you, 
.  .  .  and  wherein  ye  stand :  by  which  also  ye  are  saved  ;  .  .  . 
For  I  delivered  unto  you  first  of  all  that  which  I  also  received, 
how  that  Christ  died  for  our  sins  according  to  the  Scriptures  ; 
and  that  he  was  buried,  and  that  he  rose  again  the  third  day 
according  to  the  Scriptures."  —  i  Cor.  xv.  1-3. 

What  is  Christianity  ?  What  is  it  that  is  pro- 
posed to  us  by  the  Church  for  our  acceptance,  and 
the  acceptance  of  which  renders  us  disciples  of 
Jesus  ?  What  is  it  that  we  have  in  Him  which 
constitutes  Him  the  Saviour  of  those  that  are 
His  people  ?  This  is  the  question  to  which  we 
now  turn. 

It  may  seem  a  very  unnecessary  question,  and 
may  be  met  at  once  with  the  answer  that,  of 
course,  every  one  knows  what  Christianity  is, 
that  there  are  more  unsettled  issues  that  call  for 
our  attention.  But  that  is  not  the  case.  His- 
tory shows  that  there  is  no  question  upon  which 
Christians  have  been  more  divided  than  the  very 
fundamental  one  as  to  the  essential  character  of 
what  St.  Paul  terms  "the  vocation"  wherewith 
they  are  called  ;  and  observation  shows  that  it  is 
the   same  at  present.     Not  that  true  believers 


26  WHAT  IS   CHRISTIANITY? 

vary  in  their  inner  life,  in  the  relations  of  their 
hearts  to  the  Redeemer ;  but  nevertheless,  in 
theory,  they  "  who  profess  and  call  themselves 
Christians  "  disagree  ab  initio  as  to  what  they 
would  define  Christianity  to  be.  This  is  proven 
by  the  divisions  that  have  been  so  frequent,  by 
the  corruptions  to  which  Christendom  has  been 
subjected,  and  by  the  persecutions  that  have 
marked  its  history.  How  can  all  this  be  ac- 
counted for,  save  by  the  existence  of  a  radical 
divergence  as  to  what  constitutes  the  true  faith 
of  Christ's  holy  name  ?  For  divergence  here 
affects  everything  else.  They  who  separate  on 
this  issue  pursue  paths  that  never  come  together 
again.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  all  differences 
among  Christians  on  other  matters,  all  that  pro- 
duces separation  and  alienation,  may  be  traced 
back  to  underlying  differences  here.  This  will 
be  seen  as  we  proceed,  and  it  shows  how  the 
consideration  of  this  matter  must  precede  those 
which  are  to  follow.  Our  conceptions  of  Christ, 
the  Church,  Theology,  the  Bible,  will  depend 
upon  our  conclusions  here,  and  it  is  only  by  a 
happy  inconsistency  that  one  who  is  astray  in 
this  issue  can,  as  undoubtedly  many  do,  hold  cor- 
rect and  helpful  views  upon  these  subjects. 

Many  answers  are  given,  more  or  less  expli- 
citly, to  our  question  ;  but  they  may  all  be  re- 
duced to  three,  each  of  which  carries  with  it 
weighty  consequences,  and  such  as  can  have  no 
place  under  its  alternatives. 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY?  27 

One  is  that  Christianity  is  a  set  of  laws  for 
life,  to  be  met  by  submissive  obedience.  Christ 
came  to  be  a  lawgiver,  to  guide  us  into  a  con- 
duct which  will  secure  the  rewards  that  God  has 
to  bestow.  This  was  the  tendency  of  the  Chris- 
tianity of  Europe  in  the  early  ages,  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  Church  had  as  its  task  the  reducing 
to  order  of  barbarous  and  turbulent  peoples. 
Fortunately,  the  Church  had  the  power  to  make 
itself  obeyed  by  them  when  it  spoke  in  magis- 
terial tones,  and  we  must  see  the  hand  of  Pro- 
vidence in  its  work.  But  the  tendency  was 
worked  out  very  naturally  in  the  practical  teach- 
ing of  Rome,  that  obedience  to  Christ,  through 
t>£  Church  that  represents  Him,  regard  for  its 
%afs  an<^  canons,  is  that  which  constitutes  per- 
F0yJal  piety.  But  this  conception  of  Christianity 
ib  not  confined  to  Rome.  It  is  openly  maintained 
by  some  who  speak  of  "  the  religion  of  Jesus 
Christ,"  who  mean  that  His  work  was  to  show 
us  the  correct  laws  of  life,  that  He  redeems  by 
a  faultless  guidance. 

It  is  undoubtedly  to  be  admitted,  that  Jesus 
gave  us  laws  for  life,  "  leaving  us  an  example 
that  ye  should  follow  His  steps  ; "  but  this  does 
not  define  His  work  in  its  essentials,  nor  give  us 
the  relation  in  which  the  believer  is  to  stand  to 
Him.  To  say  that  one's  obeying  Christ  makes 
him  a  disciple  jars  upon  the  ear  that  is  attuned 
to  the  language  of  the  gospel  narratives.  It  is 
not  the  attitude  that  He  expects.     It  is  at  war 


28  WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY? 

with  all  that  is  regenerating  and  precious  in 
Christianity,  reduces  it  to  the  level  of  the  world's 
philosophies  and  religions,  transforms  a  Friend 
and  a  Saviour  into  a  ruler  and  a  pedagogue. 

Another  definition  of  Christianity  is  that  it  is 
a  series  of  doctrines  to  be  received,  that  is,  doc- 
trines in  the  sense  of  theological  propositions. 
This  was  the  prevailing  tendency  of  the  Eastern 
Church,  which  regarded  Christ  chiefly  as  the 
revealer  of  divine  truth.  But  it  has  been  also 
the  prevailing  character  of  Protestantism,  which, 
since  its  first  days,  has  not  actually  held  to  that 
principle  of  justification  by  faith  which  it  has  pro- 
fessed to  advocate  so  strenuously.  Controversy 
with  Rome  and  frequent  internal  dissensi  3 
led  very  naturally  to  the  emphasizing  of  con  t 
opinion,  or  precise  doctrine ;  and  this  resu*  \ 
in  the  identification  of  the  gospel  with  dogmai-  ; 
statements.  This  idea  has  become  deeply  im- 
bedded in  the  popular  mind,  is  so  generally  the 
conception  of  the  Church's  work,  that,  probably, 
it  would  be  the  answer  given,  as  a  matter  of 
course,  by  the  average  person  to  the  question, 
What  is  Christianity  ?  It  is  on  this  basis  that 
Christianity  is  attacked  by  most  of  its  assailants. 
This  is  the  assumption  and  the  strength  of  ag- 
nosticism, which  asserts  that  our  doctrines  are 
but  speculations  concerning  abstruse  things,  and 
at  the  most  only  guesses.  This  definition  may 
still  appear  correct  to  superficial  thinkers,  and 
be  defended  by  some  who  claim  to  speak  for  the 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY?  29 

faith.  It  is  plausible,  and  seems  to  be  what  the 
Church  has  taught  us ;  but  all  its  force  is  due  to 
a  confusion  of  thought.  It  involves  errors  and 
evils  that  condemn  it  as  unwarranted,  and  the 
vindication  of  our  belief  is  not  to  be  encumbered 
with  the  difficulties  that  it  brings  with  it. 

Unquestionably,  correct  doctrine  is  important. 
Right  living  must  always  be  connected  with 
right  thinking.  Furthermore,  Christ  did  give  us 
light  upon  divine  things,  which  we  are  to  accept. 
But  the  statement  that  Christianity  is  a  set  of 
doctrinal  propositions  cannot  stand  for  an  in- 
stant. 

In  the  first  place,  it  also  jars  upon  the  ear  that 
is  used  to  the  words  of  Jesus,  to  the  invitations 
that  He  made,  and  the  relationship  which  He 
sought  to  create  between  Himself  and  men. 
But,  beyond  this,  it  leads  logically  to  the  posi- 
tion that  to  accept  these  propositions  makes  one 
a  disciple ;  or  that  soundness  of  belief  on  deep  | 
things  constitutes  acceptability  before  God.  This 
has  been  in  fact  the  result  wherever  this  idea  has 
been  held.  It  led,  as  we  all  know,  in  the  Greek 
Church,  to  a  complete  divorce  between  religion 
and  life,  to  the  substitution  of  orthodoxy  of  con- 
fession for  personal  piety  ;  and  it  has  done  the 
same  thing  very  widely  in  the  Protestant  world. 
It  is  to-day  maintained,  by  implication  if  not  ex- 
pressly ;  as,  in  a  Christendom  divided  by  secta-  \ 
rianism  it  must  be  :  for  a  sect  gives  up  the  rea- 
son for  its  existence  if  it  says  that  correct  opinion 


3<D  WHA  T  IS  CHRISTIANITY? 

is  not  supreme  in  importance.  Orthodoxy,  or 
what  is  regarded  as  such,  is  evidently  believed  to 
be  the  crowning  virtue,  the  great  criterion  of 
Christianity,  by  a  multitude  of  our  fellow  citi- 
zens in  this  land.  It  has  been,  and  still  is,  made 
to  do  that  which  only  charity  should  do,  "  cover 
a  multitude  of  sins  ; "  and  rightly  so,  if  to  be- 
lieve in  Christ  is  to  assent  to  tenets.  It  also 
leads  to  the  corollary  that  the  more  doctrines  a 
man  assents  to,  the  more  fully  he  is  a  theologian, 
the  more  advanced  and  real  a  Christian  is  he. 
Then,  the  wise  and  learned,  not  the  lowly  and 
ignorant,  can  alone  be  Christ's  ideal  followers. 
Then,  the  untutored  saints,  the  obscure  ones 
who  have  known  little  of  such  things,  are  ex- 
cluded from  the  crowns  to  which  we  had  thought 
them  entitled. 

The  evils  that  have  consistently  flowed  from 
this  idea  of  Christianity  condemn  it.  It  has 
been,  with  perfectly  plain  warrant,  the  cause  of 
quarrels  and  heart  burnings  and  self-righteous- 
ness. It  has  lighted  the  fires  of  persecution, 
and  covered  fields  with  blood.  The  man  who 
holds  to  it  may  be  shocked  by  the  atrocities  of 
an  Alva  seeking  to  reduce  the  Netherlands  to 
correct  belief  by  the  sword,  but  he  has  no  right 
to  condemn  his  principle. 

So,  both  these  answers  to  our  question  are,  to 
one  who  has  "the  mind  of  Christ,"  condemned 
by  their  implications,  if  not  by  their  very  utter- 
ance.    But  they  are  condemned  by  another  test 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY?  3 1 

which  must  be  final.  I  dwell  upon  this,  because 
our  fellow  religionists  are  generally  astray  here, 
despite  their  professions  to  the  contrary ;  and 
because  the  amplification  of  the  error  may  lead 
to  the  elucidation  of  the  truth  regarding  the 
matter,  which  to  many  is  really  difficult  of  per- 
ception. The  effect  of  religious  controversy, 
most  of  it  entirely  unnecessary,  has  been  a  great 
confusion  of  thought,  rendering  it  to  many  no 
easy  task  to  see  why  we  must  earnestly  repudi- 
ate the  very  idea  that  Christianity  may  be  de- 
fined in  either  of  the  ways  mentioned  ;  why  it  is 
perilous  to  its  essence  and  its  value  to  use  lan- 
guage implying,  in  any  manner,  that  we  regard 
it  as  either  a  code  of  laws  or  a  system  of  doc- 
trines. 

Any  definition  of  our  faith  must  be  such  as 
makes  it  a  gospel.  This  is  what  the  race  calls 
for,  in  its  sorrows  and  its  sins,  and  every  sympa- 
thetic heart  longs  for  it.  Some  intervention  from 
on  high  to  help  them  bear  their  burdens  is  the 
one  prayer  of  the  children  of  men.  Now,  Chris- 
tianity claims  to  be  such.  Christ  Himself  al- 
ways so  spoke.  His  work  is  summed  up  in  that 
invitation,  "  Come  unto  me,  and  I  will  give  you 
rest."  As  such  it  was  always  presented  by  His 
apostles.  So  to  preach  it,  the  Church  was 
founded  and  commissioned.  Furthermore,  a  gos- 
pel must  be  a  power  to  better  men,  to  transform 
character.  The  wish  to  comfort  has  been  the 
aim   of  every  benefactor  of  the  race,   but  none 


32  WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY? 

has  succeeded  in  the  effort.  The  task  was  ever 
beyond  him.  So  the  endeavor  of  philosophers 
has  been  to  find  a  power  that  will  free  men  from 
their  sinfulness,  deliver  them  from  "  the  body  of 
this  death."  They  have  told  of  the  love  of  ideal 
beauty,  the  enthusiasm  of  humanity,  and  the 
power  of  habit,  but  these  have  all  been  found 
vain.  After  all  their  eloquence,  their  listeners 
have  replied  that  something  else  was  needed  to 
be  a  good  news  for  those  who  wanted  help  to 
change  the  downward  current  of  their  lives,  to 
enable  them  to  curb  their  passions  or  to  purify 
their  hearts.  If  Christianity  is  a  gospel,  it  must 
be  equal  to  these  demands.  But  how  can  it  pos- 
sibly be  such  under  either  of  the  definitions  that 
have  been  given,  and  which  are  so  widely  held, 
in  fact  if  not  in  form  ?  Is  it  a  code  of  laws  ?  Is 
Jesus  a  Saviour  in  that  He  is  an  example  ?  Has 
He  revealed  to  us  only  the  way  that  we  should 
walk  in  ?  How  can  that  transform  us  ?  Then  the 
motive  to  sway  us  can  only  be  a  spirit  of  obe- 
dience. But  that  will  never  change  the  heart. 
On  the  contrary,  the  heart  must  first  be  changed 
before  it  can  obey.  Some  motive  is  demanded 
adequate  to  render  men  willing  and  able  to  fol- 
low this  example.  And  how  can  it  comfort?  It 
is  just  the  reverse  ;  it  is  a  discouragement.  We 
already  know  enough  of  our  duty  to  crush  us, 
and  a  Christ  who  merely  shows  us  laws  that  God 
would  have  us  obey  only  adds  new  burdens.  He 
does  not  save,  but  condemns.     It  were  better  if 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY?  33 

He  had  never  come,  than  that  He  should  have 
come  but  to  present  perfect  ideals  to  those  whose 
hearts  are  sad  and  whose  lives  are  dark  because 
of  their  conscious  inability  to  realize  the  imper- 
fect ideals  that  they  have  already  before  them. 
Or,  how  is  it  with  the  definition  that  Christianity 
is  but  a  system  of  doctrinal  statements  about 
things  mysterious  and  divine,  given  to  us  by 
Jesus,  as  the  race's  teacher  ?  What  has  that  to 
do  with  the  change  of  character  ?  It  may  arouse 
the  motive  to  understand  them,  stimulate  men- 
tal activity ;  but  how  can  assent  to  truths  make 
one  better  ?  To  suppose  that  a  man's  admission 
that  a  proposition  is  true  will  do  him  any  good 
is  the  fallacy  at  the  bottom  of  persecution,  and 
also  of  controversial  argument.  It  is  a  complete 
non-sequitur.  He  may  be  convinced  by  reason- 
ing, or  coerced  by  suffering,  and  yet  be  unaf- 
fected in  his  life.  And  the  result  is  the  same 
when  the  definition  is  tested  by  the  fact  that  the 
Church's  mission  is  to  do  what  God  wills  when 
He  says,  "  Comfort  ye  my  people."  How  can  it 
do  so  with  such  a  Christianity  ?  What  consola- 
tion is  there  in  mere  dogmas  or  doctrines  ?  What 
peace  is  found  for  the  tried  and  the  suffering,  the 
weary  and  the  heavy  laden,  in  the  possession  of 
mere  knowledge  ?  Wherein  can  they  do  more 
than  the  propositions  of  philosophy  or  the  teach- 
ings of  art  ?  How  can  either  conception  of  our 
religion  give  rest  ?  How  can  we  know  whether 
we   correctly   apprehend  the   doctrine   or   suffi- 


34  WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY? 

cicntly  obey  the  laws,  with  which  some  would 
identify  it  ?  No  one  can  know  in  either  case 
that  he  has  warrant  for  feeling  "  confidence  to- 
wards God," — whether  he  is  really  a  Christian 
or  not.  Orthodoxy  of  thought,  as  well  as  ortho- 
doxy of  life,  is  ever  an  uncertain  thing  ;  and,  if 
we  rely  upon  it,  we  must  say,  as  Rome  does  con- 
sistently, that  we  cannot  tell,  until  the  judgment 
day,  whether  we  can  hope  for  "the  rest  that  re- 
maineth  for  the  people  of  God,"  whether  we 
are  partakers  of  "  the  salvation  that  is  in  Christ 
Jesus."  In  either  case,  we  are  driven  to  salva- 
tion by  works,  and  that  means  despair  ;  for  any 
thoughtful  man  sees  that  he  cannot  find  peace 
through  his  own  works,  save  by  adopting  stand- 
ards which  he  knows  to  be  lower  than  the  ideal, 
when  the  ideal  is  alone  the  true. 

What,  then,  is  the  definition  of  Christianity 
which  will  render  it  a  gospel  ?  It  is  that  which 
was  universal  in  Christendom  until  controversy 
and  corruption  blinded  the  eyes  of  Christians  to 
the  true  preciousness  of  their  Saviour  ;  that  which, 
despite  all  this,  has  yet  been  the  changeless  defi- 
nition of  the  Church  in  its  one  accepted  confes- 
sion ;  that  which,  behind  all  confusions  and  per- 
versions of  mind,  is  the  conception  that  strength- 
ens the  heart  and  sways  the  life  of  every  real 
believer  to-day.  It  is  that  we  have  in  Christ  a 
body,  not  of  laws  nor  of  dogmas,  but  of  facts  ; 
that  the  Church  is  to  make  known,  as  received 
from  Him,  not  merely  rules  for  conduct  nor  dis- 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY?  35 

closures  regarding  things  mysterious  and  divine, 
but  certain  actual  transactions,  things  effected, 
abiding  relationships  established,  that  change  the 
whole  character  and  outlook  of  life.  We  need 
to  know  God,  to  have  a  revelation  of  Him  that 
is  found  in  no  source  which  is  accessible  to  us 
here  below ;  to  know  whether  and  how  we  may 
be  spared  the  consequences  of  our  guilt,  and  be 
freed  from  the  anxieties  that  lie  so  heavily  on 
the  heart  of  humanity.  This  race  is  ever  asking  : 
Is  there  any  salvation  from  the  guilt  and  the  mas- 
tery of  sin  ?  Is  there  any  hope  in  presence  of  the 
all-conquering  power  of  death  ?  Is  there  any  care 
that  watches  over  us  and  directs  events  for  good  ? 
Has  anything  been  done,  is  there  any  provision, 
for  these  great  wants  of  a  world  that  only  knows 
its  own  impotence,  and  walks  through  mystery 
to  darker  mysteries  before  it  ?  To  such  ques- 
tions, compared  to  which  all  others  sink  into  pale 
insignificance,  Christianity  is  the  answer,  in  the 
person,  the  life,  the  work,  the  death,  the  resur- 
rection, the  ascension  of  Jesus  Christ ;  in  His 
gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  His  living,  directing 
presence,  unseen  yet  actual ;  facts  all  as  real  as 
any  facts  of  history  or  experience.  This  is  set 
forth  in  the  ordinance  of  baptism,  wherein  Jesus 
comes  to  us  and  we  to  Him  :  that  God  is  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost ;  that  in  Him  are  provi- 
dence, salvation,  sanctification,  not  only  disclosed 
as  dispositions  of  mind,  but  shown  to  be  opera- 
tive in  actual   events,   producing   new  relation- 


36  WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY? 

ships,  readjustments,  restoration,  through  the 
historical  occurrences  of  the  career  of  Jesus.  So 
Christianity  comes  to  us  as  a  series  of  concrete 
facts  relating  to  God's  dealing  with  us  for  our 
redemption,  some  having  occurred  long  ago,  some 
present  realities  to-day,  some  yet  to  be  realized ; 
all  parts  of  the  one  great  fact  of  the  mediatorial 
work  of  Christ. 

This  is  the  way  in  which  Jesus  Himself  preached 
His  gospel,  and  markedly  the  manner  in  which 
His  apostles  preached,  as  seen  by  the  many  ex- 
amples that  we  have  of  their  mode  of  presenting 
their  message.  They  always  preached  as  St.  Paul 
did  in  our  text.  He  was  concerned,  in  this  letter 
to  the  Corinthians,  with  the  matter  of  the  resur- 
rection, and  instead  of  any  abstract  statements 
simply  says  that  his  gospel  tidings  regarding  it 
was  making  known  certain  facts  concerning  the 
resurrection  of  Christ.  And  what  was  the  Church 
organized  for  ?  Only  and  solely  to  do  as  they  did 
who  founded  it,  proclaim  these  facts  brought 
about  by  and  included  in  the  work  of  the  Re- 
deemer. Therefore  it  is  consistent  that  the 
Church's  universal  Creed,  the  one  on  which 
Christians  are  united,  the  one  which  alone  our 
historical  fold  requires  for  baptism,  the  so-called 
Apostles'  Creed,  should  be  a  statement  of  them. 
There  is  not  a  law,  nor  a  dogmatic  proposition  in 
it  :  only  a  list  of  actual  occurrences,  past,  present, 
and  future,  which  constitute  the  salvation  of 
mankind.     This  is  what  a  creed  must  always  be 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY?  37 

for  a  body  that  would  proclaim  the  gospel.  To 
introduce  doctrinal  definitions,  or  rules  for  con- 
duct, may  be  good  elsewhere,  but  they  have  no 
place  in  a  statement  of  what  is  to  be  made  known 
in  a  ministry  to  the  world.  And  so  it  must  be 
whenever  that  work  is  done.  There  are  bodies 
that  have  more  or  less  elaborate  confessions  to 
which  they  exact  assent  from  those  who  would 
join  them,  because  they  express  what  their  seces- 
sions stand  for ;  but,  when  they  would  do  mis- 
sionary work,  they  are  compelled  to  give  all 
these  up  and  preach  only  the  redemptive  facts 
that  constitute  Christianity  ;  therein  coming  back 
to  just  what  their  fathers  gave  up  for  some  tem- 
porary theological  system,  or  for  the  dogmatic 
inferences  of  some  earnest  but  unduly  confident 
speculations.  Would  that  none  had  ever  forgot- 
ten that  the  Christian  message  is  simply  one  of 
actual  transactions  in  our  behalf ;  and  that  all 
had  abstained  from  that  tendency  to  afhrm  ab- 
stract principles,  to  elaborate  all  the  conse- 
quences and  implications  of  gospel  details,  which 
has  really  cursed  Christendom,  and  has  been 
the  weakness  and  injury  of  a  Protestantism  that 
gave  greater  hopes  for  the  world  than  have  been 
realized. 

In  the  light  of  this  definition  we  see  what  is 
personal  Christianity.  It  is  a  resting  upon  those 
facts,  confidence  in  their  adequacy  for  our  needs, 
as  mortals  and  as  immortals.  That  is,  it  is  faith. 
The   other  conceptions  mentioned   are  met   by 


38  WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY? 

intellectual  submission,  and  by  obedience ;  but 
this  is  met  by  trust.  Intellectual  submission 
and  obedience  are  not  religious  acts.  They  do 
not  make  a  man  pious,  though  they  may  render 
him  wise  and  decent ;  but  faith  is  a  religious,  a 
pious  thing,  and,  as  all  these  facts  on  which  we 
rest  for  our  salvation  are  achievements  of  Christ, 
Christian  piety  is  after  all  faith  in  Him  as  the 
sufficient  Saviour  of  men  from  all  their  ills  and 
all  their  perils. 

This  comforts.  The  acceptance  of,  and  repos- 
ing upon,  such  verities  as  those  in  the  creed  of 
Christendom  must  and  does  make  men  strong  to 
overcome  the  world,  hopeful  in  discouragement, 
able  to  confide  in  God  despite  conscious  sinful- 
ness, and  to  persevere  despite  repeated  weakness 
of  will ;  yes,  able  to  lay  away  their  dear  ones 
without  despair  and  to  see  their  own  lives  ebbing 
without  dismay.  It  gives  peace  of  mind  when 
we  ask  whether  we  are  accepted  before  God.  As 
we  have  seen,  if  we  are  to  rely  upon  holding  cor- 
rect doctrinal  opinions,  or  upon  compliance  with 
the  laws  of  God,  we  can  never  feel  confidence 
that  all  is  well.  But  when  our  discipleship  is 
relying  upon  these  saving  facts  of  God's  inter- 
vention in  Christ,  or  relying  upon  Christ's  work 
and  Christ's  self,  then  we  can  feel  assurance  ; 
since,  though  a  salvation  of  our  own  never  can, 
one  effected  by  Him  must,  be  sufficient.  A  pro- 
vision for  our  requirements  made  by  Him  must 
be  one  that  we  can  trust  implicitly. 


WHAT  IS   CHRISTIANITY?  39 

And  Christianity  so  presented  is  a  power  to 
transform  character.  Some  criticise  this  concep- 
tion of  it  as  not  providing  an  energy  for  that 
holiness  which  must  be  the  end  and  aim  of  all 
religion.  It  is  said  that  this  piety  of  faith  will 
render  men  indifferent  to  obedience  because  they 
will  be  led,  by  consistency,  to  think  it  needless. 
On  the  contrary,  we  may  affirm  that  this  piety 
of  faith,  when  real,  —  and  that  is  what  we  mean 
by  it,  —  is  the  only  form  that  has  ever  yet  made 
any  one  holy :  that  is,  made  any  one  do  the  will 
of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  sincerity  and  truth. 
They  whose  piety  has  been  only  regard  for  rules 
have  not  been  changed  in  character.  Indeed 
they  cannot  be,  for  the  character  must  first  be 
changed,  and  that  calls  for  some  motive  that  will 
control  the  heart  sufficiently  to  make  it  willing 
to  obey.  Whatever  may  seem  to  be  the  case, 
every  true  follower  of  Jesus  has  been  so  because 
to  him  Christianity  was  faith,  first  and  foremost ; 
and  no  other  form  of  it  has  ever  rendered  men 
better,  whatever  their  professions  may  have  been. 
The  reason  is  that  this  confidence  in  Christ  ren- 
ders him  who  has  it  lovingly  grateful  to  this 
Saviour ;  and  grateful  love  is  the  strongest  motive 
for  good  that  exists.  Man  will  do  more  for  man 
under  its  impulse  than  under  any  other ;  and 
men  have  done  whatever  they  have  done  for 
Christ  because  of  it.  It  has  made  the  saints  of 
the  Church.  St.  John  said,  "We  love  Him  be- 
cause He  first  loved  us  ;"  and  St.  Paul,  "The  love 


40  WHA  T  IS   CHRISTIANITY? 

of  Christ  [to  us]  constraineth  us."  What  else, 
than  this  grateful  love  for  the  redemptive  deeds 
of  Jesus  has  made  men  and  women  do  and  en- 
dure what  believers  have  ?  No  amount  of  doc- 
trinal information  given  by  Jesus,  nor  of  regula- 
tions for  conduct  received  from  Him,  could  have 
moved  the  hearts  that  have  been  moved  to  that 
devotion  and  heroism  and  obedience  in  which 
His  disciples  have  left  behind  all  the  zeal  and 
bravery  and  loyalty  of  this  world. 

So  do  we  see  the  difference  between  this  defi- 
nition of  Christianity  and  the  others,  which  are 
both  so  widely  held,  sometimes  avowedly,  some- 
times impliedly  ;  and  how  important  it  is  to  avoid 
all  phraseology  that  gives  any  impression  to  the 
world  which  we  would  win,  that  our  faith  is  iden- 
tified with  either  of  them.  It  includes  laws  for 
life,  of  course ;  it  includes  doctrines,  of  course ; 
its  object  is  the  regeneration  of  character,  its  im- 
plication, the  knowledge  of  mysterious  things ; 
but  it  is,  in  itself,  a  system  or  series  of  redemp- 
tive facts  which  are  included  in  the  one  great 
fact  of  Jesus  Christ  being  the  Mediator  and  Sav- 
iour of  the  world.  Apprehend  clearly  that  thus 
alone  can  Christianity  be  what  we  want  and  so 
worth  cherishing,  a  gospel  to  comfort  and  trans- 
form the  weary  and  the  sinful  children  of  men. 

We  are  now  in  a  position  to  see  what  is  real 
unbelief,  or  essential  skepticism,  as  to  the  gospel 
of  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  not  doubting  any  particu- 
lar tenet,  or  rejecting  this  or  that  doctrine,  or 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY?  41 

differing  from  any  authority  upon  this  or  that 
point.  To  do  so  may  be  regrettable,  it  may  be 
dangerous,  it  may  be  wrong,  it  may  be  heresy ; 
yet  it  is  not  necessarily  the  denial  of  Christian- 
ity itself.  That  is  denying,  or  questioning,  that 
Jesus  is,  or  does,  what  it  has  claimed  that  He  is 
and  does  for  man  ;  it  is  refusing  to  accept  Him 
and  His  work  as  the  true  relief  for  human  needs  ; 
it  is  saying  that  this  gospel  of  facts  is  not  true. 
He  who  believes  these  things  assents  to  the 
Church's  message.  He  who  relies  upon  them  is 
a  believer.  It  is  only  he  who  does  not  this  that 
is  a  skeptic ;  only  he  who  controverts  these  facts 
is  an  infidel.  This  should  be  urged  more  and 
more,  and  both  friends  and  foes  must  be  made  to 
see  that  to  attack  Christianity  in  its  essence  they 
must  deal  with  this  issue  ;  that  assaulting  the 
Church's  message  as  formulated  in  her  creed  is, 
and  nothing  else  is,  assaulting  the  citadel  and 
dangerous  to  the  Christian  position. 

And  here  we  see  the  peril  of  a  new  form  of 
unbelief  held  by  many  pious  and  godly  men,  and 
by  men  of  great  spiritual  elevation.  They  tell 
us  that  Christianity  can  be  rendered  independent 
of  the  historical  element  in  it ;  that  we  can  and 
must  so  present  it  as  to  render  it  a  help  to  men, 
without  requiring  belief  in  events  so  difficult 
to  verify  as  the  occurrences  of  centuries  ago. 
Now,  there  are  some  who  may  find  light  and 
comfort  in  the  gospel  thus  conceived  of,  in 
thoughts  of  the  love  of  God  and  His  present  care 


42  WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY? 

and  the  hope  of  eternal  life,  without  connecting 
them  with  actual  transactions  ;  but  it  is  because 
they  have  been  nurtured  in  the  old  form  of  the 
faith,  and  know  that  such  precious  facts  are  true 
because  they  are  displayed  in  the  work  of  the 
Saviour.  Apart  therefrom  they  are  pure  specu- 
lations, beautiful  guesses ;  perhaps  true,  but  not 
such  actualities  as  we  can  rest  upon  in  storms  of 
sorrow  or  of  temptation.  None  have  ever  be- 
lieved in  them  who  have  not  learned  them  from 
the  incidents  of  Christ's  work.  There  is  no  rea- 
son to  believe  in  God's  mercy,  or  a  Father's  care, 
or  the  power  of  resurrection,  or  the  Spirit's  as- 
sistance, except  as  we  learn  them  from  Jesus  ; 
and  they  that  use  these  facts  for  their  comfort 
are,  whatever  they  say,  using  a  light  that  He 
kindled  when  He  was  on  earth,  and  that  has  been 
kindled  from  no  other  source.  So,  beware  of 
this  high-minded  and  plausibly  commended  at- 
tempt to  render  our  faith  independent  of  occur- 
rences in  Palestine  long  ago.  It  may  avert  some 
difficulties,  but  it  creates  others  that  are  vastly 
more  serious.  It  is  taking  just  the  same  position, 
only  in  a  far  more  extreme  way,  as  that  assumed 
by  those  who  tell  us  that  Christianity  is  a  set  of 
theological  propositions,  and  strange  to  say,  it  is 
done  by  the  last  men  of  whom  we  should  expect 
it,  men  who  have  been  opponents  of  dogmatic 
religion.  It  is  also  eviscerating  our  religion  of 
all  that  makes  it  a  gospel  to  our  brethren  and 
sisters  in  this  world,  who  can  only  find  comfort 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY?  43 

in  real  facts  that  bring  to  them  relief.  It  is  ren- 
dering the  transforming  good  news  a  series  of 
abstract  truths,  for  which  we  have  no  sufficient 
certitude,  and  which  never  could  affect  a  charac- 
ter, or  touch  a  heart  not  already  softened.  There 
are,  as  we  shall  see,  satisfactory  proofs  of  the  his- 
torical reality  of  the  facts  in  question,  though 
they  happened  two  thousand  years  ago  ;  but  be 
this  as  difficult  as  it  may,  it  is  better  to  cling  to 
the  Christianity  of  facts  than  to  take  up  with  a 
form  of  it  which  has  no  certainty,  is  essential 
unbelief  of  what  Jesus  sent  His  apostles  to  pro- 
claim, essential  unbelief  in  Himself,  and  though  it 
may  retain  the  semblance  and  much  of  the  value 
of  Christianity  in  the  generation  that  adopts  it, 
will  have  neither  in  the  next  one,  which  will  con- 
sistently follow  it  out. 

But  how  about  the  institutions  of  Christianity, 
its  holy  days,  its  ministry,  its  ordinances,  above 
all,  its  sacraments  ?  These  things  are  undoubt- 
edly so  prominent  in  our  system  that  they  must 
be  included  in  any  definition  of  it,  and  place  must 
be  found  for  their  true  estimate.  Alas  !  as  with 
so  many  other  things,  these  externals  have  been 
but  too  generally  the  subject  of  mistaken  valua- 
tion, leading  to  divisions  about  matters  on  which, 
if  anywhere,  there  should  be  union  and  fellow- 
ship. We  know  how  they  have  been  exaggerated 
in  their  importance,  and  used  for  intolerable  pur- 
poses, for  official  aggrandizement  and  spiritual 
despotism,  for  the  excitement  of  fanaticism,  the 


44  WHAT  IS   CHRISTIANITY? 

soothing  of  conscience,  the  fostering  of  a  formal 
piety.  It  is  no  wonder  that  there  has  come  at 
times  a  reaction  against  them  and  a  teaching  that 
they  are  of  no  real  value,  not  essential  to  Chris- 
tianity. This  is  the  tendency  in  the  air  to-day. 
It  is  called  spiritual  religion.  The  minimization 
of  them  is  considered  an  advance  in  real  piety. 
The  one  thing  to  be  aimed  at  in  growth  in  grace 
is  to  be  independent  of  them.  Then  comes  their 
neglect,  and  a  reluctance  to  urge  them.  It  is 
said  to  be  needless  to  go  to  church.  Sacramental 
observance  is  outgrown,  and  the  organization  of 
the  Church  regarded  as  of  no  importance  and  of 
no  authority. 

But  let  us  not  be  carried  away  by  any  such 
plausible  language,  nor  intimidated  by  any  abuse 
of  the  institutions  of  our  faith,  so  that  we  fail  to 
see  just  what  they  are  worth.  If  Christianity  is 
a  body  of  facts  in  the  work  of  Jesus  Christ,  to  be 
reposed  upon  in  faith  for  the  comforting  and  the 
transforming  of  life,  then  their  office  is  to  in- 
crease and  to  render  more  controlling  that  reli- 
ance upon  Him  who,  by  these  facts,  has  made 
provision  for  a  world's  needs.  What  is  said  of 
the  sacraments  in  the  Articles  of  our  Church  is 
true  of  them  all,  "  By  them  God  doth  not  only 
quicken  but  also  strengthen  and  confirm  our  faith 
in  Him."  They  are  not  to  be  used  for  what 
might  be  their  function  under  different  concep- 
tions of  our  relation  to  Christ  ;  that  is,  they  are 
not  to  teach  theology,  nor  to  impress  lessons  of 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY?  45 

ethics,  as  if  either  of  these  were  His  message 
to  mankind.  That  they  have  been  often  so  em- 
ployed, is  well  known ;  and  the  Church  has  been 
made  to  serve  exclusively  as  a  school  of  morals 
or  of  doctrine.  That  such  should  be  the  results 
of  its  work  is  true,  but  such  is  not  its  immediate 
task,  which  is  to  increase  the  faith,  to  intensify 
the  trust,  of  the  children  of  men  in  their  Lord 
and  Saviour.  This  faith  produces  holier  living, 
more  unselfish  conduct,  and  fuller  views  of  truth  : 
things  that  come  in  no  other  way,  and  cannot  by 
any  zeal  or  any  eloquence  be  produced  in  human 
hearts  without  it. 

That  these  external  features  have  done  this 
work  is  written  in  large  letters  on  the  page  of 
history.  It  is  they  that  have  handed  on  from  age 
to  age  the  redemptive  achievements  of  Christ, 
and  deepened  that  faith  which  has  been  the 
source  of  the  consolation  and  sanctification  of  a 
multitude  whom  no  man  can  number.  Even  in 
their  abuse,  even  when  in  the  hands  of  unworthy 
men,  they  have  been  "  means  of  grace,"  the 
means  whereby  the  gospel  has  been  brought 
home  and  rendered  a  power  for  good  to  those 
whom  they  have  reached.  There  can  be  no  per- 
petuation of  Christianity  without  them,  nor  has 
piety  been  sustained  in  their  absence.  The  re- 
sult of  neglecting,  or  dispensing  with  them,  has 
been  the  fading  away  of  Christian  faith  and 
Christian  living  in  the  communities  or  the  indi- 
viduals that  have  tried  it,  however  high  the  aims 


46  WHAT  JS   CHRISTIANITY  1 

or  devout  the  motives  that  prompted  them.  This 
is  the  reason  why  we  insist  upon  them  so  strenu- 
ously, to  the  frequent  surprise  of  brethren  about 
us ;  why  we  cannot  recognize  as  normal  any 
Christianity  that  treats  ancient  ordinances,  ven- 
erable ways  of  apostolic  precedent,  or  holy  sacra- 
ments, as  matters  of  indifference.  The  whole 
efficiency  of  the  gospel  is  bound  up  with  them, 
and  souls  will  starve  without  them.  At  the  same 
time,  we  must  never  regard  them  as  valuable  save 
for  the  one  end  of  promoting  faith  in  Christ  and 
His  salvation,  of  bringing  about  closer  relations 
with  Him  ;  having,  indeed,  as  their  objects,  purer 
thinking  and  more  unselfish  living,  but  through 
the  awakening  of  that  grateful  love,  which  faith 
engenders,  and  which  both  opens  the  eyes  to 
spiritual  truth  and  strengthens  the  will  to  the 
following  of  Jesus. 

If  Christianity  be  what  we  have  said,  some 
important  inferences  will  be  seen  to  follow.  One 
is  the  way  in  which  it  must  be  preached.  If  it 
be  a  gospel  of  soul-comforting  and  soul-redeem- 
ing facts,  then  we  are  to  address  men  on  the 
basis  of  their  needs,  with  the  feeling  that  in  this 
world  they  have  great  wants  for  which  we  have 
relief  to  bring  them.  What  people  want  for 
real  life  is  real  facts,  things  achieved  for  them  ; 
and  a  true  ministry  is  to  give  them  those  facts 
as  they  are  found  in  Christ.  It  must  be  the 
Church's  sleepless  endeavor  to  urge  these  reali- 
ties upon  them  as  what  their  experiences  call 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY?  47 

for  ;  and  to  show  how  they  satisfy  their  necessi- 
ties. Therein  lies  the  attractiveness  of  Jesus. 
Some  tells  us  that  this  consists  in  the  beauty  of 
His  character,  others  in  the  light  He  gives  to 
our  ignorance,  others  in  His  faultless  ideals  for 
life.  These  are  all  true,  but  that  which  attracts 
men  and  women  to  Him,  the  magnetic  power 
that  has  drawn  the  millions  to  Him,  is  something 
else  :  it  is  His  being  that  for  which  in  their  sad- 
nesses and  weaknesses  they  long,  "  the  light  of 
life ; "  that  for  which  the  saint  of  old  cried  out 
when  he  said,  "  Lead  me  to  the  rock  that  is 
higher  than  I."  Herein  lies  our  warrant  for  be- 
lieving in  His  triumphs.  That  will  receive  men's 
allegiance  which  helps  them.  On  this  basis,  noth- 
ing but  this  gospel  has  any  chance  of  supremacy 
in  coming  years.  Philosophy  cannot  expect  it. 
Centuries  of  effort  have  only  made  its  insuffi- 
ciency pitiably  evident.  Old  religions  tell  of 
disappointed  hopes  in  many  a  despairing  land. 
New  ones  have  no  charm  save  for  the  erratic,  no 
value  save  to  dreamers.  The  future  belongs  to 
Christ,  because  He  has  what  men  want,  and  they 
will  take  it  at  His  hands  as  soon  as  they  find  this 
out.  Consequently  each  church,  each  body  of 
Christians,  may  expect  a  share  in  the  furthering 
of  that  triumph  in  measure,  only  as  it  makes 
known  "  the  riches  of  mercy  that  are  in  Christ 
Jesus  our  Lord,"  the  things  done  in  His  gospel 
for  a  race  that  could  do  nothing  for  itself.  With- 
out this,  no  prestige  of  ancient  lineage,  no  pos- 


48  WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY? 

session  of  venerable  claims,  no  record  of  other 
days,  no  numbers  can  secure  a  share.  Nothing 
tells  with  a  needy  race  but  ministering  the  provi- 
sion for  their  needs.  To  this  ministration  alone 
they  will  gather,  as  there  alone  they  should. 

How  then  do  we  explain  it  that  so  many  do 
not  heed  the  Church's  message  ?  It  may  be  due 
to  an  unawakened  sense  of  need.  Those  whose 
religious  cravings  are  not  alive,  or  who  have 
been  strangers  to  vicissitude  and  softening  ex- 
periences, those  who  are  hardened  or  frivolous, 
may  not  be  expected  to  listen  to  an  offer  of  re- 
demption. They  that  are  whole,  or  think  them- 
selves so,  need  not  a  physician,  but  they  that  are 
sick.  In  such  cases,  there  need  be  no  surprise 
at  indifference.  They  must  first  be  made  to  ask 
before  they  can  receive,  to  feel  their  wants  be- 
fore they  can  accept  an  offer  of  relief.  We  can 
only  wait  hopefully  for  the  Providence  of  God 
and  for  His  Spirit,  to  render  such  willing  to 
hold  out  their  hands  for  the  bread  of  life,  willing 
in  penitence  to  cast  themselves  upon  Christ  and 
rest  on  His  salvation. 

But  this  will  not  account  for  all  cases  of  indif- 
ference, nor  for  so  many  as  some  may  say.  It 
were  flattering  our  own  souls  to  assume  that, 
whenever  pews  are  empty  or  words  are  vain,  the 
fault  is  in  those  who  listen,  or  whom  we  would 
reach.  There  is  more  seriousness  than  many  a 
clergyman  realizes  among  men  and  women  with 
whom  he  mingles  too  little.     There  is  much  less 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY?  49 

rebellion  against  truth  and  much  less  self-suffi- 
ciency than  are  sometimes  charged.  If  one  go 
about  among  his  fellows  in  a  sympathetic  and 
brotherly  way,  he  will  find,  to  his  increasing  sur- 
prise, that  many  a  man,  of  whom  he  had  not 
thought  it,  has  sober  moments,  and  soul-hunger 
for  what  this  world  cannot  give.  The  rejection 
of  Christianity  by  such  is  due  to  something  else 
than  hardness  of  heart.  There  are  business 
men  and  worldly  women  who  would  truthfully  re- 
pudiate the  charge  of  repelling  the  will  of  God, 
ignoring  help  and  salvation,  but  who  would  scorn 
the  narrow  ecclesiastic  who  says  that  not  heed- 
ing his  words  means  refusing  the  light  of  the 
gospel.  Their  condition  is  like  that  of  the  sail- 
ors on  the  vessel  that  once  found  its  supply  of 
fresh  water  exhausted,  when  apparently  becalmed 
on  the  wide  sea.  Day  after  day  it  drifted,  and 
the  agonies  of  thirst  increased.  Another  vessel 
hove  in  sight  at  length,  and  the  sufferers  sig- 
naled "  Give  us  water  !  We  are  dying  of  thirst." 
To  their  amazement,  back  came  an  answering 
signal,  "Dip  it  up  !  "  Again  they  made  their  ap- 
peal, and  again  they  read  the  seemingly  mocking 
response  in  the  flags  of  the  distant  bark.  At 
length,  one  man,  thinking  it  might  not  have  been 
a  mockery,  did  dip  some  water  from  the  ocean 
and  found  it  fresh  and  sweet.  Then  they  saw 
that  they  were  in  the  mouth  of  the  mighty  Ama- 
zon, and  had  been  for  days  praying  for  what  was 
all  about  them.     So  are  there  many  in  this  world 


50  WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY? 

thirsting  for  refreshment  and  strength  because 
they  have  not  been  made  to  see  that  it  is  all  at 
hand  ;  ignoring  the  gospel  of  Christ,  not  because 
they  are  indifferent  to  it,  but  because  they  have 
not  been  shown  how  free  it  is,  and  how  to  draw 
upon  its  riches.  That  is,  the  unbelief  of  many 
can  only  be  the  fault  of  those  who  are  sent  to 
preach  the  good  news.  It  should  solemnize  every 
church  and  every  minister  to  think  that,  if  some 
really  thirsty  soul,  some  earnest  heart,  does  not 
rest  upon  the  Saviour's  work,  it  may  be  only  be- 
cause He  has  not  been  properly  made  known  to 
him.  He  is  a  brave  man  who  dares  to  say,  as 
some  seem  to  say,  that  the  responsibility  of  men 
and  women  for  failure  to  profess  acceptance  of 
the  Redeemer  is  to  be  measured  by  their  indif- 
ference to  his  words.  It  must  rest  upon  himself, 
perhaps,  as  often  as  upon  them.  He  can  only 
feel,  the  Church  can  only  feel,  readiness  to  meet 
the  Lord,  who  will  call  us  all  to  account,  in  meas- 
ure as  we  have  faithfully  and  plainly  set  forth 
the  good  news  of  God's  salvation  in  Christ. 
Where  that  is  done,  we  can  expect  that  men  will 
accept  it  as  surely  as  the  hungry  will  accept  food. 
To  these  considerations,  which  show  why  the 
indifference  of  so  many  does  not  prove  that 
Christianity  is  not  the  true  provision  for  human 
needs,  we  must  add  that  there  are  many  that 
find  in  it  strength  and  peace  who  make  no  pro- 
fession of  it  ;  that  there  are  many  more  whose 
lives  are  brightened  by  it,  whose  characters  arc 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY!  5 1 

purified  by  it,  than  those  whose  names  are  re- 
corded in  our  parochial  registers,  or  who  seek 
the  advice  of  clergymen.  This  may  not  be  as  it 
should  be,  yet  Christ  knows  of  a  great  multitude 
who  secretly  have  enshrined  Him  in  their  hearts, 
who  furtively  rest  on  the  facts  that  the  Church 
was  founded  to  proclaim. 

And  this  leads  us  to  the  definition  of  Chris- 
tianity with  regard  to  the  religions  of  the  world  ; 
a  subject  in  respect  to  which  there  is  not  only 
much  error  taught  that  is  due  to  unbelief,  but 
also  much  confusion  of  thought  on  the  part  of 
those  who  claim  to  be  believers,  and  who  ought 
to  know  better.  Careless  or  skeptical  thinking 
leads  both  to  denial  of  the  value  of  missions  and 
to  such  views  of  them  as  practically  surrender 
the  cause  and  the  principle  of  the  gospel. 

What  are  the  religions  of  the  world  ?  They 
vary  very  much  in  form,  very  much  in  the  degree 
of  their  elevation  or  degradation  of  thought  and 
life,  yet  they  are  all  expressions  of  that  univer- 
sal element  in  the  human  mind  which  we  call 
religion,  or  a  sense  of  dependence  upon  higher 
powers.  Religion  and  piety,  or  holiness,  while 
they  ought  to  be  the  same,  and  are  so  regarded 
among  us,  are  not  the  same  in  fact.  Multitudes, 
indeed  most  men,  look  up  to  a  God  more  or  less 
unknown,  and  dread  Him,  without  their  lives 
being  thereby  influenced  for  good.  There  is 
goodness  without  religion,  and  religion  without 
goodness,  although  so  divorced  neither  is  what  it 


52  WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY? 

should  be.  The  religions  of  different  lands  are 
the  local  expressions  of  a  sense  of  dependence ; 
they  are  Teachings  out  after  God,  attempts  to 
gain  tokens  of  His  disposition,  endeavors  to  se- 
cure some  response  to  the  anxieties  that  weigh 
so  heavily  upon  the  hearts  of  all,  wherever  their 
abode.  And,  back  of  all  is  a  sense  of  guilt,  or  of 
the  deserved  displeasure  of  the  deity  invoked. 
This  is  seen  in  the  universality  of  sacrifice,  and 
of  laborious  rites  and  painful  penances,  whereby 
the  worshiper  seeks  to  appease  the  wrath  of  the 
deity  and  avert  his  punishments.  This  may  not 
be  clearly  felt  by  the  offerer,  there  may  be  noth- 
ing left  of  it  but  some  ancient  custom  that  once 
expressed  it,  yet  it  is  a  feature  of  all  the  forms 
of  religion  in  the  world.  In  short,  these  religions 
are  modes  of  worship.  They  are  not  faiths,  as 
people  sometimes  call  them,  when  speaking  of 
the  faith  of  Asia  or  of  China.  The  worshiper 
has  not  any  faith,  does  not  believe  in  anything, 
has  not  any  trust  at  all.  What  is  wanted  and 
sought  after  is  something  to  lay  hold  of  and  to 
rely  upon,  in  presence  of  the  sorrows  of  earth, 
the  reality  of  sin,  the  approach  of  death,  the  de- 
mands of  justice.  Their  whole  shape  and  tone 
show  that,  at  the  best,  they  are  appeals,  prayers, 
supplications,  cries  to  God  ;  and,  instead  of  there 
being  any  such  thing  as  the  Faith  of  Heathen- 
dom, the  earnest  heathen  would  give  his  all  to 
have  faith  and  gain  the  peace  that  it  alone  can 
give. 


WHAT  IS   CHRISTIANITY?  53 

Now,  what  is  Christianity  ?  Is  it  one  of  these 
religions  wherein  men  have  formulated  their 
Teachings  out  after  God,  expressed  their  specu- 
lations and  guesses  regarding  what  He  is  and 
what  lies  beyond  the  grave  ?  Some  say  that  it  is 
such  ;  that  it  is  the  highest  result  of  the  human 
search  for  truth,  the  flowering  of  the  instinct  of 
religion,  the  loftiest  form  of  worship,  the  purest 
conception  of  things  unseen,  due  chiefly  to  the 
teaching  of  Jesus.  Some  tell  us  He  was  the 
man  who  of  all  others  has  seen  farthest  into  the 
spiritual  realm,  and  so  is  the  leader  of  the  race 
in  its  approach  to  God  ;  but  others,  more  consis- 
tently and  more  plausibly,  tell  us  that  He  was 
such  a  leader  for  those  who  live  in  the  lands  that 
have  come  under  His  influence,  and  that  Chris- 
tianity is  only  a  set  of  speculations  that  are  as 
human  as  any  others,  peculiarly  suited  to  our 
circumstances.  If  this  is  so,  missions  are  of 
doubtful  propriety.  Then  let  each  people  keep 
its  own  religion,  for  it  may  be  presumed  to  be 
most  fit  for  it,  as  the  outcome  of  its  own  expe- 
riences and  aspirations.  Though  ours  be  con- 
ceded to  be  best,  yet  if  that  is  all,  we  may  well 
shrink  from  disturbing  old  ways  for  its  exten- 
sion, for  it  might  lead  to  derangements  and  divi- 
sions and  even  sufferings,  which  would  be  too 
great  a  price  to  pay  for  the  mere  improvement 
of  that  which  is  good.  If  each  land's  religion  is 
its  own  way  of  coming  to  God,  then  it  suits  it 
like  a  garment,  and  we  should  not  try  to  replace 


54  WHAT  IS   CHRISTIANITY? 

it  by  our  own.  It  were  not  worth  the  while  to 
supplant  a  Buddha  by  a  Jesus,  if  each  is  the 
teacher  for  his  own  people. 

But  this  assumption,  that  Christianity  is  that 
evolution  of  religious  thought  and  activity  with 
whose  results  we  are  favored,  can  only  be  made 
by  those  who  are  as  ignorant  of  what  it  claims 
to  be  as  of  what  it  is.  Christianity  does  not 
come  to  us  in  the  shape  of  a  human  aspiration  or 
effort  after  God,  of  an  attempt  to  gain  relief  from 
Him.  Christianity  is  not  what  man  has  taught 
to  man,  but  what  God  has  done  for  man  in  Jesus ; 
and  what  we  mean  by  accepting  it  is  placing 
faith  in  its  good  news  of  soul  comforting  and  soul 
redeeming  facts  :  a  gospel  from  heaven,  not  an 
appeal  from  earth.  This  is  seen  not  only  in  its 
creed,  which  affirms  belief  in  revealing  and  sav- 
ing transactions  achieved  in  our  behalf,  but  also 
in  all  its  inner  life  and  all  its  external  features. 
As  to  its  creed,  the  real  believer  relies  upon  it, 
not  as  what  man  has  invented  in  his  loftiest  re- 
ligious soarings,  but  as  what  the  Father  of  us 
all  has  sent  to  us  in  Christ,  and  as  what  can  be 
leaned  upon  as  no  results  of  human  thinking 
ever  can  be ;  for,  in  presence  of  eternal  and  di- 
vine facts,  the  sublimest  speculation  excels  but 
little  in  certainty,  perhaps  not  at  all,  the  prat- 
tlings  of  infancy.  As  to  its  observances,  the  key- 
note of  its  worship  is  not,  like  human  worship, 
supplication  and  appeal,  but  it  is  glad  thanksgiv- 
ing. '  Its  hymns  are  not  like  those  of  the  Vedas, 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY?  55 

only  lofty  adoration^ at  the  best:  they  are  out- 
pourings of  joy  for  glad  tidings  from  beyond  the 
veil  of  the  unseen.  Its  central,  one  obligatory 
rite,  is  indeed  a  sacrifice,  but  a  sacrifice  of 
thanksgiving,  a  eucharist  of  gratitude,  not  an 
offering  to  propitiate. 

Everything  that  represents  it  shows,  then,  that 
Christianity  is  something  essentially  different 
from  the  religions  of  the  world,  whether  the  an- 
cient ones  of  pagan  lands,  or  the  newer  ones  de- 
vised to  satisfy  the  religious  instinct  in  lands  we 
call  Christian.  It  claims  to  be  that  for  which 
they  ask,  the  result  for  which  they  labor,  the  re- 
sponse of  God  to  the  world's  wants,  the  voice  out 
of  the  inaccessible  world  for  which  human  hearts 
do  crave.  Instead  of  being  one  of  them,  it  is 
not  a  religion  at  all.  That  is  a  misnomer  :  for  it 
is  in  itself  a  revelation,  in  its  adherents  a  faith, 
or  the  reverse  of  a  religion.  It  is  not  a  way  to 
seek  to  please  God,  but  a  gospel  from  a  God  who 
is  already  pleased,  for  our  comfort  and  our  guid- 
ance. Its  membership  means,  not  asking,  but 
receiving.  Its  people's  hands  are  held  out  to 
God  :  yet  not  to  supplicate  His  mercy,  but  to 
take  the  bounty  that  His  mercy  gives. 

If  it  is  the  diametrical  opposite  of  what  has 
been  meant  or  expressed  in  the  religions  of  the 
world,  then  it  is  inconsistency  for  any  one  who 
calls  himself  a  Christian,  it  is  infidelity,  to  class 
it  among  them,  or  in  any  way  to  make  it  differ- 
ent in  degree  only  and  not  in  kind.     And  we  see 


56  WHAT  IS   CHRISTIANITY? 

a  real  infidelity  in  even  the  frequently  heard  ex- 
pression, "the  religion  of  Jesus."  Whatever 
may  be  intended,  that  phrase  implies,  and  is  often 
meant  to  imply,  that  Christianity  is  a  system  of 
worship  which  He  established  and  which  should 
supersede  all  others,  as  a  higher  approach  to 
God ;  that  He  has  taught  us,  not  merely  as  a 
man,  but  even  it  may  be  said  as  the  Son  of  God, 
how  to  draw  near  to  our  Father  in  Heaven. 
This  is  true  undoubtedly,  in  one  sense.  In 
Christianity  is  the  only  true  and  acceptable  hom- 
age rendered,  the  only  true  light  possessed.  But 
this  is  not  true  as  a  definition  of  the  mission  of 
Christ  and  of  what  He  came  to  found  on  earth. 
He  did  not  come  to  show  us  how  properly  to  call 
upon  God,  nor  how  to  serve  Him  acceptably. 
He  came  to  bring  God  to  us,  to  found  a  Church, 
not  of  those  who  serve  God,  but  of  those  who 
love  Him,  prompted  not  by  a  sense  of  needs  un- 
satisfied, but  by  a  sense  of  blessings  received. 
Its  piety  is  the  piety  of  praise,  not  the  piety  of 
supplicating  prayer. 

Therefore,  to  him  who  believes  in  this  gospel 
there  can  be  no  question  of  the  duty  to  spread  it 
in  every  land.  For  it  is  what  the  heathen  are 
really  praying  for,  the  light  that  they  are  crying 
for  who  sit  in  darkness  ;  that  for  which  they  plead, 
out  of  their  lot  of  suffering,  in  all  the  religions  of 
this  world.  And  so,  respect  for  old  religious  sys- 
tems, or  lofty  and  generous  efforts  after  new 
ones,  instead  of  keeping  us  from  urging  upon  the 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY?  57 

heathen  our  own  faith,  should  do  the  reverse. 
The  wider  the  cult,  the  more  numerous  its  adher- 
ents, the  greater  the  appeal  that  comes  to  us  who 
have  what  they  all  seek  in  vain.  The  more  ven- 
erable the  altars,  the  more  hoary  the  temples,  the 
more  ancient  the  groves,  where  earth's  children 
worship,  the  more  intense  the  claim  upon  us  to 
give  them  that  for  which  they  have  so  long  and 
so  pleadingly  waited.  And  the  purer  the  dreams, 
the  higher  the  aspirations  of  a  people,  the  more 
direct  is  our  duty  to  tell  them  of  that  gospel 
which  can  alone  give  the  life  and  guidance  that 
they  crave. 

These,  then,  are  the  reasons  for  missions  and 
for  their  hopefulness.  Sometimes  they  are  ad- 
vocated as  the  teaching  of  correcter  doctrines  or 
purer  ethics ;  and  then  they  are,  naturally,  but 
love's  labor  lost.  The  heathen  are  not  hunger- 
ing for  such  things.  What  they  want  is  a  power 
to  rise  to  newness  of  life,  a  comfort  for  life's 
vicissitudes.  They  want  this  more  than  people 
here  at  home.  If  human  needs  call  for  a  gospel, 
there  are  no  such  burdens  on  life  here  as  rest  on 
the  life  of  heathendom.  There  is  more  suffering, 
more  weariness,  more  despair,  more  degradation 
among  them  ;  and  consequently  there  is  more 
religion,  more  praying,  more  self -mortification, 
more  appeals  to  Heaven,  than  we  see  about  us  in 
our  world.  Take  to  them  this  Christianity  as  a 
gospel  of  facts  regarding  what  has  been  done, 
what  is  doing,  and  what  is  yet  to  be  done  by 


58  WHAT  IS   CHRISTIANITY? 

Christ's  work,  and  it  will  spread.  With  increas- 
ing rapidity,  as  the  divine  plans  mature,  they  will 
come  to  this  faith  which  is  what  they  bitterly 
need.  Deserting  ancient  shrines  and  immemo- 
rial rites,  they  will  fall  at  the  foot  of  the  uplifted 
cross,  the  one  availing  altar  ever  raised  on  earth 
for  human  atonement. 

On  the  historic  plain  of  Thebes,  surrounded 
by  the  ruins  of  palaces  and  temples,  that  tell  of 
departed  greatness  and  vanished  ambitions,  there 
stands  erect  the  statue  of  Memnon.  It  looks,  as 
it  has  looked  for  ages,  out  towards  the  east  whence 
comes  the  dawn,  and  it  is  said  that  they  who 
dwell  about  it  have  been  wont  to  hear  at  sunrise 
a  note  of  music  when  the  first  rays  of  the  new 
day  come  to  bathe  those  wreck-strewn  fields  with 
light  and  beauty.  So  it  is  with  the  heathen  world, 
the  whole  world  that  is  yet  without  the  Christ. 
Surrounded  by  the  ruins  of  its  hopes,  saddened 
by  ever  present  reminders  of  its  failures,  the  van- 
ity of  all  endeavors  to  build  for  it  a  city  which 
would  give  it  rest,  this  race  of  ours  is  looking 
eagerly  for  a  new  and  better  day,  looking  with 
intenser  yearning  as  each  century  comes  on.  It 
is  a  silent  world,  silent  of  praise.  It  has  no  heart 
to  sing,  no  hope  to  tune  its  voice  to  joy.  But, 
when  the  Sun  of  Righteousness  rises  upon  it,  with 
healing  in  His  rays,  then  in  measure  as  to  it  is 
brought  the  good  news  of  the  redemption  that  is 
in  Jesus  Christ,  its  silence  will  give  place  to  song, 
its  despair  to  expectation  ;  and  from  a  race  that, 


WHAT  IS   CHRISTIANITY?  59 

through  its  religions  and  its  speculations  vainly 
looked  for  God,  will  rise  an  anthem  that  will 
breathe  forth  the  gladness  of  a  heart  at  rest,  of 
anxieties  relieved,  and  of  a  hope  born  to  die  no 
more. 

Such,  then,  is  our  definition  of  Christianity  and 
its  consequences,  the  definition  which  the  Church 
itself  gives  :  a  gospel  of  mercy  in  the  person  and 
work  of  the  Son  of  God.  Its  life  is  a  life  of  faith. 
Its  stimulus  is  grateful  love.  Its  power  is  that 
it  meets  human  appeals  for  help.  Its  prospect  is 
supremacy,  because  mankind  will  surely  come  to 
drink  of  its  refreshing  waters  when  'wearied  in 
the  greatness  of  their  way.'  Cling  to  this  con- 
ception. Let  no  influences  delude  you  to  accept 
any  other,  no  eloquence  confuse  your  apprehen- 
sion of  it.  Your  life  will  be  bright,  your  heart 
strong,  your  hope  clear,  your  doubts  removed,  as 
day  by  day  you  live  in  the  trustful  discipleship 
of  the  One  Saviour  of  the  world. 

For  there  is  no  other.  There  are  many  voices 
abroad  to-day  that,  perhaps  in  kindness,  claim  to 
preach  good  news  to  men,  and  too  often  with  a 
zeal  and  a  vigor  that  might  put  the  Church  to 
the  blush.  Art  with  its  fair  visions  of  an  ideal 
realm,  material  progress  with  its  promises  of 
ease,  education  with  its  mental  pleasures,  science 
with  its  plans  of  social  improvement,  all  say, 
"  Come  unto  me,  and  I  will  give  you  rest."  But 
apply  the  test  that  St.  Martin  used  in  his  cell,  as 
the   legend   tells   us,  when   tempted  by  a  false 


60  WHAT  IS   CHRISTIANITY? 

Christ.  He  was  wont  to  pray  daily  for  a  vision 
of  the  Lord  he  loved  so  ardently,  and  one  day 
there  appeared,  as  he  thus  prayed,  a  person  of 
majestic  mien,  in  resplendent  attire,  girt  with  a 
golden  girdle  and  wearing  a  jeweled  crown. 
"Who  art  thou?"  asked  the  saint.  "lam  the 
Lord  whom  thou  hast  asked  to  see.  Behold  me 
and  adore,"  was  the  reply.  Awestruck  at  the 
sight,  and  yet  wishing  to  be  sure  that  his  homage 
would  not  be  misplaced,  the  saint  hesitated.  "  On 
thy  knees,  good  Martin,  if  thou  dost  believe,"  said 
the  figure  that  lighted  up  his  lowly  cell.  Humbly, 
yet  bravely,  this  wise  man,  who  knew  that  pomp 
and  state  are  not  the  decisive  signs  of  the  Son 
of  God,  replied :  "  Show  me  thy  hands  and  thy 
side  !  '  With  a  cry  of  rage  and  dismay  the 
tempter  vanished,  for  it  was  Lucifer  personating 
the  Saviour,  who  was  thus  exposed  by  a  test  he 
could  not  meet. 

So,  when  other  claimants  come  to  you  for  your 
allegiance,  whether  prophets  of  culture,  or  of 
learning,  or  of  civilization,  of  old  religions  or  of 
ambitious  new  ones,  ask  them  too  :  "  Show  me 
thy  hands  and  thy  side  !  Show  me  what  you 
have  done,  or  can  do,  for  us  needy  children  of  a 
dying  race."  Then  will  they  too  be  silenced  and 
vanish  in  defeat.  For  only  where  there  have 
been  such  achievements  for  mankind,  such  ben- 
efits conferred,  as  are  these  redeeming  facts  which 
the  Church  of  Christ  proclaims,  can  be  given  the 
faith  that  comforts  and  transforms.   Poor,  pitiable, 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY?  6 1 

helpless  saviors  are  they  all  in  presence  of  Him 
who  came  out  of  the  infinite  vastnesses  to  reveal 
to  us  our  God  ;  who  lived  to  set  us  "  an  example 
that  we  should  follow  in  His  steps  "  ;  who  died 
for  our  redemption  on  the  bitter  cross  ;  who  rose 
again  to  open  unto  us  the  gates  of  the  everlast- 
ing life ;  who  ascended  into  heaven  where  He 
ever  liveth  to  make  intercession  for  us  ;  who  sent 
the  Holy  Spirit  to  help  our  infirmities ;  who  is 
with  His  people  unto  the  end  of  the  world ;  who 
will  come  again  to  bring  about  "  the  restitution 
of  all  things,  which  God  hath  spoken  by  the 
mouth  of  all  His  holy  prophets  since  the  world 
began."  And  this  is  the  gospel  which  is  preached 
unto  you,  the  only  message  to  this  world  which 
can  be  called  good  news. 


LECTURE   III. 

WAS   JESUS    CHRIST    AN    HISTORICAL    REALITY  ? 

"  The  certainty  of  those  things  wherein  thou  hast  been  in- 
structed." —  Luke  i.  4. 

We  have  seen  that  Christianity  is  in  its  his- 
tory, and  in  its  own  definition  by  the  universal 
creeds,  a  body  of  facts  to  be  received  and  relied 
upon  in  faith,  to  the  comforting  and  transform- 
ing of  life. 

But  are  the  facts  in  question  actual  ?  Are  not 
the  objections  brought  by  opponents  sufficient 
to  warrant  hesitation  in  relying  upon  things 
which  occurred  so  long  ago  ?  Is  there  not  so 
much  difficulty  about  this,  that  we  may,  at  best, 
only  find  comfort  in  the  ideas  involved,  and,  as 
some  do  and  have  done,  abstain  from  making  all 
turn  upon  actual  events  ? 

This  brings  us  to  the  matter  of  the  so-called 
Evidences  of  Christianity,  which  form  a  vast 
literature,  representing  great  labor  and  great 
learning.  But  there  are  some  leading  disadvan- 
tages attaching  as  a  rule  to  these  works.  One 
is  that  they  deal  with  issues  that  are  not  now 
in  controversy.  The  assaults  on  our  faith  vary 
from  age  to  age,  and  a  defense  that  is  efficient 
at  one  time  does  not  meet  new  foes  who  attack 


WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL  REALITY?     63 

at  a  different  point.  This  is  the  case  with  the 
chief  works  of  the  last  century,  when  an  antag- 
onism peculiarly  active  was  met  by  a  display  of 
erudition  and  power  such  as  has  had  no  superior, 
and  was  fully  adequate  at  the  time.  Especially 
is  this  the  case  with  that  great  book,  Butler's 
Analogy.  Unanswerable  by  those  to  whom  it 
was  addressed,  it  gives  little  trouble  to  the  unbe- 
lief that  is  most  vigorous  to-day.  Substantially, 
its  position  is  that  there  are  no  difficulties  in 
Christianity  which  are  not  also  in  natural  reli- 
gion. This  is  true,  and  it  replied  effectively  to 
those  who  once  advocated  such  a  religion,  or 
deism,  as  it  was  called.  But  now  the  trouble  is 
that  unbelief  admits  the  analogy,  and  gives  up 
Christianity  and  deism  as  equally  unacceptable. 
There  has  been  a  recent  attempt  to  revive  this 
latter  in  a  widely  read  book,  but  it  is  a  position 
that  few  earnest  thinkers  will  accept,  for  Butler 
has  forever  rendered  it  untenable,  as  having  all 
the  difficulties  of  the  gospel  without  its  value. 
So,  this  line  of  argument  is  as  apt  to  make  athe- 
ists as  to  make  believers,  in  the  present  state 
of  the  controversy  ;  and,  although  a  book  that 
can  never  be  obsolete  on  account  of  its  mine  of 
wisdom  and  its  unsurpassed  genius,  yet  as  a 
weapon  for  our  use,  Butler's  Analogy  is  not  the 
argument  that  is  needed  now. 

Another  difficulty  attaching  to  the  apologetics 
of  the  past  is  that  they  are  too  erudite,  require 
too  much  of  either  personal  learning  or  accep- 


64      IV AS   CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY? 

tance  of  the  statements  of  others,  for  ordinary- 
use.      This   marks    signally  the   great   work   of 
Paley.     It  appeals  only   to  scholars.      It  makes 
all  the  argument  for  Christianity  turn  upon  the 
genuineness  of  the   New  Testament  narratives. 
This  argument  is,  as  we  believe,  good  for  those 
who  can  pursue  it,  but  it  requires  especial  train- 
ing  and  opportunity  to  verify  its   force.     Few 
clergymen,  and  still  fewer  laymen,  have  the  nec- 
essary attainments  in  languages  to  read,  and  in 
history  to  appreciate,  the  ancient  documents  upon 
which  the  argument  is  virtually  based,  or  even 
the  opportunity  to  see  them.     Therefore,  at  the 
best,  we  have  to  come  to  this,  that  the  proof  of 
the  New  Testament  authenticity  rests,  for  all  but 
a   few,   upon   the    statements    of    other   people. 
This  is  a  strong  position,  yet  it  is   not  always 
satisfactory  to  make  such  important  issues  turn 
upon  the  correctness  of  the  assertions   of  schol- 
ars.    It  is  the  same  with  a  stronger  argument, 
the  admissions  of  the  enemy.     It  is   a  curious 
and  little  known  fact,  that  learned  unbelievers 
now  generally  admit  all  we  claim  for  the  Gospels 
and  for  St.  Paul's  great  Epistles.     This  may  save 
us  a  retort,  and  give  some  of  us  great  confidence ; 
but   this  also  is  not  satisfactory  to  many  minds. 
The  reply  may  be  made  that  the  New  Testament 
writers  either  were  deceivers  or  deceived,  or  that 
a  critical  inquirer  into  the  verities  of  our  faith 
wants  more  than  the  admissions  of  foes  or  the 
testimonies  of  friends.     He  wants  evidence  that 


WAS   CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY?     65 

he  himself  can  weigh,  who  is  not  qualified  for  a 
learned  and  laborious  discussion.  Therefore  we 
need,  and  the  laity  should  have,  reasons  for  be- 
lief which  are  more  direct  and  immediate,  and 
that  do  not  turn  upon  even  the  authenticity  of 
the  New  Testament.  For,  as  we  shall  see  when 
we  speak  of  the  Bible,  our  faith  does  not  rest 
upon  the  volume  itself,  but  only  upon  what  it 
contains.  Yet  we  are  so  familiar  with  it,  and 
with  the  perusal  of  the  Christian  facts  as  therein 
preserved,  that  we  are  apt  to  imagine  that  we  get 
the  facts  only  from  it,  and  are  entirely  dependent 
upon  it.  But  this  is  clearly  not  so.  Christianity 
comes  to  us  especially  through  the  Church,  but 
also  in  the  very  life  of  the  world  and  its  litera- 
ture, and  is  forced  upon  our  attention  apart  from 
any  perusal  of  the  Scriptures. 

Now,  can  we  construct  an  argument  that  every 
sensible  man  or  woman  can  follow,  without  hav- 
ing to  know  history  and  peruse  ancient  manu- 
scripts, or  without  having  to  meet,  if  we  argue 
from  the  New  Testament,  the  reply  that  we  must 
first  prove  it  to  be  trustworthy  ?  We  think  we 
can ;  and  each  thinking  man  believes  the  gospel 
just  because  of  such  arguments,  whether  it  is 
realized  or  not.  To  deny  this  is  like  saying  that 
a  man  cannot  be  sure  of  the  Declaration  of  In- 
dependence of  1776,  without  reading  the  original 
document  ;  or  that  one  cannot  argue  for  his  own 
birth  without  showing  the  registry  of  its  occur- 
rence, or  its  entry  in  the  family  records.  Let  us 
seek  to  construct  such  an  argument. 


66     WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY? 

It  seems  strange  to  have  to  prove  that  Chris- 
tianity is  true,  at  this  date  and  in  this  land  ; 
strange  that  any  should  question  it  or  deny  it. 
Think  what  it  has  done.  It  has  done  the  work 
of  a  gospel.  Then  it  must  be  true,  we  should 
think  ;  for  a  medicine  that  heals  a  disease  must 
be  the  right  one.  What  we  need  is  a  faith  that 
can  comfort  hearts  and  redeem  character.  Wher- 
ever that  comes  from,  it  is  what  we  want,  and 
we  should,  we  must,  and  we  will  accept  it.  If 
Christianity  is  not  true,  and  does  not  come  from 
God,  we  must  then  accept  it  as  from  some  other 
source  that  is  found  to  be  kinder  than  God. 
Then  we  must  look  up  to  that  source,  give  thanks 
to  it,  and  pray  to  it.  It  may  be  human  or  angelic, 
as  we  are  told ;  then  the  man  or  angel  that  has 
given  us  this  gospel  is  to  be  our  God  ;  since  what 
we  mean  by  God  is  a  being  who  can  and  will  pro- 
vide for  our  needs  and  relieve  our  ills.  We  must, 
we  should,  adore  and  trust  the  giver  of  such  a 
real  and  actual  redemption.  But  this  shows  how 
absurd  it  is  to  affirm  that  Christianity  is  not  the 
gift  of  God.  He  that  can  bestow  such  a  bless- 
ing as  the  gospel  has  been  to  man  and  can  re- 
spond to  our  wants  so  adequately  must  be  one 
who  loves  and  pities  us  ;  and  there  is  no  one  of 
whom  that  can  be  said  but  "  the  Father  of 
Lights,"  from  whom  cometh  every  good  and 
every  perfect  gift. 

But  we  must  come  to  a  closer  issue,  it  is 
frankly  admitted.     All  turns  upon  the  reality  of 


WAS   CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY?    6j 

Jesus  Christ,  as  a  person  who  lived,  taught,  suf- 
fered, died,  and  rose  again,  nearly  nineteen  hun- 
dred years  ago.  We  must  meet  the  challenge 
to  show  our  reasons  for  placing  our  confidence 
in  Him,  and  the  facts  that  are  connected  with 
Him,  and  that  have  no  reality  apart  from  His 
own.  This  is  the  essence  of  the  controversy, 
the  citadel  to  be  defended.  All  goes  with  it. 
Everything  that  we  call  Christian,  and  that  leads 
us  to  a  different  life  and  a  different  belief  from 
those  of  the  heathen,  stands  or  falls  with  it.  If 
it  is  not  provable,  our  beliefs  are  dreams  at  best, 
our  characters  are  moulded  by  mere  specula- 
tions ;  our  homes,  our  civilization,  our  ethics,  are 
perhaps  more  enjoyable  than  those  of  China, 
but  no  more  certainly  in  accordance  with  right 
and  truth.  If  this  historical  reality  is  accepted 
as  a  rule  of  life  and  trust,  a  man  is  so  far  a 
Christian,  whatever  else  he  has  given  up  or  re- 
jected. If  not,  he  may  be  pious  and  devout,  and 
living  on  the  plane  to  which  Christianity  has 
raised  him,  but  he  is  not  a  Christian.  That  name, 
so  fraught  with  associations,  must  not  be  used 
save  for  what  it  was  meant  to  express,  for  it  is 
recorded  of  the  disciples  of  Jesus  Christ  that 
they  "were  called  Christians  first  in  Antioch." 

One  argument  for  the  actuality  of  the  story 
of  Christ  is,  that  it  was  held  and  believed  by 
those  who  lived  at  the  time,  as  is  seen  by  count- 
less proofs  of  varied  sorts.  This  is  not  saying 
that  it  is  proved  by  the  New  Testament,  for  we 


68     WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY? 

know  it  apart  from  any  reference  to  that  volume. 
The  New  Testament  proves  it  also  ;  for  put  it  as 
late  as  any  one  may  wish,  it  still  shows  at  least 
that  such  was  the  belief  at  a  time  when  peo- 
ple could  know  the  truth  in  the  premises.  But 
what  is  now  meant  is  that  other  writings,  and 
also  many  a  memorial  and  relic,  show  that,  within 
a  short  period  of  the  alleged  date  of  the  career 
of  Jesus,  there  was  a  Church  that  held  the  same 
story  that  we  have,  and  had  been  founded  for 
the  very  purpose  of  spreading  it. 

But  it  will  be  replied,  that  is  going  back  to  an- 
tiquity. Give  us  an  argument  that  we  can  weigh, 
something  that  does  not  take  us  so  far  into  the 
past.  What  evidence  is  there  now  for  the  his- 
torical reality  of  Jesus  Christ  ? 

One  is  embarrassed  by  such  a  request,  but  not 
because  it  is  difficult  to  reply  in  the  sense  that 
some  seem  to  imagine.  I  once  had  a  similar 
question  put  to  me  that  caused  a  similar  embar- 
rassment. It  was  when  visiting  the  Cathedral  of 
Aix  la  Chapelle,  which  was  built  by  Charlemagne, 
is  full  of  souvenirs  of  him,  contains  many  relics, 
and  is  his  tomb.  A  fellow  -  citizen  joined  our 
party  to  avail  himself  of  our  interpretation  of  the 
information  of  the  German  sacristan  who  accom- 
panied us.  He  was  evidently  impressed  by  the 
succession  of  memorials  of  the  great  emperor, 
the  crown,  the  bones,  the  sceptre,  the  sword,  and 
other  objects  there  preserved,  but  as  evidently 
puzzled   by   his   lack   of   historical  acquaintance 


WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL  REALITY?     69 

with  the  personage  referred  to.  He  saw  that 
this  was  some  eminent  man  of  whom  he  ought  to 
know,  but  did  not.  At  length,  when  his  curios- 
ity and  ignorance  had  been  long  reducing  him  to 
misery,  he  came  to  that  slab  in  the  floor  which  it 
thrills  one  to  stand  on,  with  its  simple  inscription, 
"  Carolo  Magno."  Here  our  friend,  unable  to 
keep  silence  any  longer,  began  to  inquire  :  "  This 
person  lived  some  time  ago,  did  he  not  ?  "  I 
replied  in  the  affirmative.  "  How  long  ago  ?  A 
hundred  years  ? "  he  asked  again.  "  More  than 
that,"  I  answered,  "  more  than  a  thousand  years 
ago."  With  a  look  of  incredulity,  which  showed 
that  he  regarded  me  as  of  doubtful  veracity,  he 
retorted  :  "  How  do  you  know  that  anything  is 
true  of  a  man  who  lived  so  long  ago?"  What 
could  I  do  ?  Where  could  I  begin  ?  I  could 
only  have  said,  had  I  time  and  had  he  been  dis- 
posed to  listen,  "  The  evidence  is  all  around  you, 
in  this  church,  this  town,  this  nation.  All  mod- 
ern Europe  proves  it."  This  is  just  the  diffi- 
culty that  comes  up  when  we  would  prove  the 
historical  reality  of  Christ.  One  does  not  know 
how  to  begin,  what  to  point  to,  out  of  all  about 
us  that  shows  it.  The  modern  world,  the  world 
of  to-day,  betokens  that  Jesus  actually  lived  and 
wrought  as  we  hold.  Its  civilization,  its  litera- 
ture, are  full  of  memorials  of  His  existence ;  all 
involve  His  teaching,  and  living,  and  dying,  and 
rising  again,  centuries  ago.  There  is  no  such 
evidence  for  Charlemagne,  or  for  Caesar,  as  there 


JO     WAS  CHRIST  A  AT  HISTORICAL   REALITY? 

is  for  Him,  in  effects  produced  or  in  memorials 
that  remain. 

But  let  us,  out  of  all  these,  select  some  palpable 
facts  and  features,  some  of  which  will  have  force 
with  one  person,  some  with  another,  and  none  of 
which  can  be  accounted  for,  save  by  admitting 
not  only  that  Jesus  was  historically  real,  but  that 
He  was  what  Christians  hold  Him  to  be,  and 
what  makes  them  Christians.  It  is  only  because 
they  are  all  such  familiar  things  that  their  force 
and  bearing  are  not  always  felt. 

Take,  for  instance,  the  religious  condition  of 
the  world.  Note  especially  our  idea  of  God.  We 
have  a  common  conception  of  Him,  as  being 
good,  merciful,  personal,  directing  and  caring  for 
the  world.  This  is  the  idea  that  is  in  all  minds 
about  us,  as  to  what  the  term  God  signifies. 
Even  they  who  may  not  concede  that  He  is,  con- 
cede that,  if  He  is,  such  is  the  necessary  concep- 
tion of  Him ;  and  the  unbelief  of  many  is  found 
to  be  due  to  the  feeling  that,  since  they  do  not 
find  any  revelation  of  such  a  God,  we  have  no 
revelation  at  all.  So  firmly  rooted  is  it  that  this 
is  the  true  idea  of  God,  that,  if  any  one,  or  any 
religious  teacher,  should  ascribe  to  Him  an  ac- 
tion inconsistent  therewith,  he  would  be  rebuked 
even  by  the  infidel  orator.  The  basis  of  his  as- 
sault upon  this  or  that  doctrine  which  he  sup- 
poses to  be  Christian  teaching  is  its  alleged  con- 
flict with  this  very  postulate,  which  must  be  as- 
sumed.    Now,  whence  came  this  idea  of  God,  so 


WAS   CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY?      yl 

known  to  be  true,  and  so  at  the  basis  of  popular 
thinking,  so  really  at  the  foundation  of  all  peace 
and  trust,  that  no  one  disputes  it  ? 

Do  you  say  that  man  has  made  it  ?  That  it 
has  been  evolved  out  of  the  higher  thinking  of 
our  ancestors  ?  Then,  why  has  it  not  been 
evolved  anywhere  else  than  in  Christian  lands, 
where  alone  it  is  known  ?  No  religions  nor  phi- 
losophies of  heathendom  ever  reached  it.  The 
results  obtained  by  human  thought,  of  higher 
power  and  longer  duration  than  our  own,  upon 
the  subject  of  God,  show  that  man  cannot  pro- 
duce this  idea  of  Him.  Yet  it  is  in  the  very  air 
about  us,  and  we  know  it  is  the  true  one  :  not  an 
idea  which  is  good  for  us,  as  another  may  be 
good  for  Asia,  but  an  absolute  idea,  the  only  one 
that  is  to  be  tolerated  as  allowable.  Now,  how 
did  it  come  to  us  ?  If  not  conceivable  that  our 
mind  evolved  it,  because  all  the  rest  of  the  human 
race  has,  in  its  evolution,  reached  no  such  con- 
clusion, then  we  can  only  account  for  it,  as  Chris- 
tianity claims,  by  its  having  been  given  to  the 
race  by  One  who  did  not  learn  it  from  the  race, 
even  the  man  Jesus  Christ.  Think  of  this,  and 
you  will  see  that  it  shows  that  such  a  thing  must 
have  happened  as  the  life  and  career  of  Jesus  to 
explain  the  knowledge  that  you  have  of  your 
Heavenly  Father. 

This  is  equally  true  of  other  beliefs  that  we 
possess,  such  as,  for  instance,  that  of  personal 
immortality ;  or,  again,  of  our  standards  of  right 


72     WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY? 

and  wrong.  These  are  our  common  heritage, 
the  conviction  of  those  who  are,  as  well  as  of 
those  who  are  not,  Christians  ;  and  they  cannot 
be  accounted  for,  as  the  peculiar  possessions  of 
Christian  lands  alone,  save  upon  the  theory  that 
those  lands  have  received,  as  others  have  not, 
the  teachings  of  one  who  made  them  known,  as 
Jesus  is  alleged  to  have  done. 

But  this  opens  up  a  vast  field  of  argument, 
even  that  based  upon  what  has  been  done  by 
Christianity.  This  is  obviously  a  subject  too 
great  to  be  more  than  indicated  in  a  general 
way ;  yet  it  may  be  worth  while  to  point  out 
some  weighty  facts  that  bear  upon  our  present 
argument. 

Think  what  it  has  done  for  the  mental  prog- 
ress of  man.  As  Balzac  said,  "Every  thinking 
man  has  to  march  under  the  banner  of  Christ. 
He  alone  has  consecrated  the  triumph  of  mind 
over  matter.  He  alone  has  revealed  the  inter- 
mediate world  that  separates  us  from  God." 
Consider  the  literature  of  Christian  lands,  so 
much  loftier  than  that  of  others  ;  their  art,  that 
is,  the  only  art  that  has  any  life  in  it ;  their  phi- 
losophizing, so  free  from  absurdities  that  char- 
acterize all  other  thinking.  Think  of  its  effects 
upon  science.  It  is,  in  fact,  the  mother  of 
science.  There  is  none  where  it  is  unknown. 
We  have  to  take  our  conquests  of  recent  date  to 
lands  far  older  in  civilization  and  more  gifted  by 
nature  with  mental  endowments.     The  reason  is 


WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY?      73 

that,  in  the  sphere  of  Christianity  alone  is  there 
any  such  consciousness  of  his  own  powers  and 
possibilities,  or  any  such  freedom  from  supersti- 
tious fears  of  nature,  that  man  aspires,  or  is  not 
afraid,  to  investigate.  They  who  have  not  re- 
ceived the  deliverance  from  despair  and  delu- 
sions with  which  Christianity  emancipates  the 
peoples  that  have  received  it  never  study  nature. 
Even  in  its  degraded  forms,  Christendom  is  freer 
than  the  highest  paganism  from  what  prevents 
the  advance  of  knowledge  ;  and  the  most  igno- 
rant and  superstitious  peasant  of  Italy  rejects,  as 
plainly  untenable,  what  the  most  intelligent  Hin- 
doo never  questions,  or  believes  as  matters  of 
course,  what  the  latter  never  dreams  of  as  pos- 
sible. 

Consider  what  it  has  done  for  the  State.  There 
is  as  yet  no  actually  Christian  state,  it  is  true,  in 
the  sense  of  its  being  supremely  controlled  by 
Christ,  yet  all  are  immensely  affected  by  it  in 
legislation,  in  jurisprudence,  in  peace,  and  in 
war.  The  most  backward  land  of  Europe  is  very 
different  from  the  most  advanced  in  Asia,  and 
has  features  in  its  life  that  would  be  an  improve- 
ment upon  the  best  specimens  of  heathendom. 
Europe  and  America  are  shaped  and  moulded,  in 
all  that  constitutes  their  excellence,  simply  by 
the  influence  of  Christianity. 

Consider  the  mark  it  has  made  upon  the  home. 
How  different  are  the  homes  of  Christendom 
from  those  of  heathendom  !     The  latter  are  so 


74      WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL  REALITY? 

horrible  that  we  shudder  at  the  idea  of  being 
condemned  to  dwell  in  them,  with  their  lust, 
their  cruelty,  their  absence  of  that  love  and  con- 
fidence that  make  our  own  so  dear.  And  they 
are  such,  chiefly  because  of  the  effects  of  Chris- 
tianity upon  the  condition  of  woman.  Some 
may  say  that  it  has  not  raised  her.  They  who 
tell  us  this,  especially  women  who  say  so,  ought 
to  be  afforded  the  opportunity  to  go  where  they 
can  have  womanhood  without  it,  and  thus  prac- 
tically find  out  what  it  has  done  to  make  her 
respected  and  other  than  a  slave  or  a  toy.  Far 
more  fond  are  the  homes,  far  more  honored  are 
the  women,  of  the  least  enlightened  Christian 
land.  This  is  a  commonplace,  and  so  need  not 
be  dwelt  upon.  Some  tell  us  that  our  faith  has 
not  raised  woman.  So  does  a  reverend  gentle- 
man in  Richmond  also  tell  us  in  this  nineteenth 
century  that  the  earth  does  not  go  round  the  sun. 

Once  more,  consider  the  effects  of  Christianity 
upon  the  condition  and  treatment  of  the  unfor- 
tunate. The  poor,  the  sick,  the  helpless,  the 
orphans,  the  insane,  the  weak,  the  blind,  the 
dumb,  are  blessed  by  it ;  their  lot  is  made  very 
different  from  what  it  is  elsewhere.  Nowhere 
more  than  in  this  sphere,  can  we  trace  effects, 
not  more  beneficent  than  direct,  to  its  influence. 

Now  there  are  two  uses  of  this  observation  of 
the  effects  of  Christianity.  One  is  that  in  so 
richly  blessing  the  world  it  is  shown  to  be  from 
God,  and   the  true  provision   for  human  needs. 


WAS   CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY?     ?$ 

But  this  is  not  the  use  that  is  now  to  be  made  of 
it.  For  it  also  serves,  for  our  present  purpose, 
as  an  argument  for  the  historical  reality  of  Jesus 
Christ,  at  the  time  alleged  by  the  Church. 

Suppose  that  from  some  point  of  elevation 
you  saw  the  ends  of  a  number  of  straight  but 
diverging  roads  coming  out  of  the  far  distance. 
You  could  easily  tell  where,  and  how  far  away, 
they  had  diverged  from  a  common  point  of  de- 
parture. But  suppose  that,  in  place  of  this  num- 
ber of  roads,  there  were  so  many  streams  of 
water,  or  so  many  beams  of  light,  or  so  many 
sounds  of  music.  Then  you  could  not  only  tell 
by  simple  calculation  how  far  away  beyond  your 
vision  lay  that  unseen  point  of  divergence,  but 
you  could  also  tell  what  would  be  found  there, 
the  size  and  quality  of  the  fountain,  or  the  bril- 
liancy and  nature  of  the  luminary  or  the  charac- 
ter and  kind  of  the  cause  of  the  sounds,  as  the 
case  might  be. 

So  is  it  with  these  present  observable  effects 
of  Christianity.  They  point  back  beyond  our 
sight,  into  the  past  ages  of  history.  But  we  can 
follow  them  up,  and  measure  the  law  of  their 
convergence  as  plainly  as  we  can  that  of  the 
streams,  or  of  the  rays,  or  of  the  sounds.  And 
the  result  is  that  they  all  meet,  about  nineteen 
hundred  years  ago,  in  a  common  origin,  in  the 
land  that  we  call  Holy.  They  all  go  back  to  it, 
as  the  one  centre  whence  they  started  to  spread 
over  the  world,  where  they  now  are  seen  and  felt. 


J6      WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL  REALITY? 

But  this  is  not  all.  We  can  tell  what  would  .be 
found  there,  could  we  reverse  the  course  of  his- 
tory, or  journey  back  up  the  ages  that  are  gone. 
We  find  that,  no  less  certainly  than  the  streams 
would  lead  us  to  a  copious  and  similar  fountain, 
or  the  beams  of  light  to  an  adequate  and  like 
constituted  source  of  illumination,  or  the  strains 
of  music  to  a  sufficient  and  an  equally  sweet  in- 
strument, would  these  effects  of  Christianity 
lead  back  to  a  person  and  a  life  like  those  of 
Jesus  Christ,  from  whom  alone  could  come  the 
refreshing  rivers  that  are  gladdening  the  hearts 
of  men,  the  brightness  that  is  lighting  them, 
the  harmonies  that  are  cheering  them,  in  widely 
separated  lands  to-day. 

And  now  we  see  the  answer  to  a  popular  fal- 
lacy regarding  the  evidences  both  for  Christ's 
historical  existence  and  for  His  divine  mission. 
Many  really  imagine  that  we  are  at  a  disadvan- 
tage now,  as  compared  with  those  who  lived  in 
ages  that  are  gone,  and  that  each  succeeding  cen- 
tury renders  the  historical  element  in  Christian- 
ity more  difficult  of  verification.  Upon  this  is 
based  that  position  which  has  been  referred  to, 
that  it  is  essential  to  our  cause  to  lay  little  stress 
upon  that  element.  But  all  this  is  precisely  the 
reverse  of  the  fact.  Succeeding  ages  render 
Christ's  mission  and  career  more  palpably  cer- 
tain, and  not  less,  because  they  bring  forth  more 
and  more  results  that  can  only  be  attributed  to 
Him.     We  have  far  more  reason  to  believe  that 


WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY?     'JJ 

He  existed  than  they  who  lived  a  thousand  years 
ago  ;  and  much  more  reason  to  believe  Him  to 
be  the  world's  Redeemer  than  those  who  saw 
and  heard  Him  in  His  lifetime ;  for  we  see,  as 
none  before  us  have  seen,  what  He  can  do  and 
has  done  for  man.  So  will  those  who  come  after 
us,  though  farther  away  from  Bethlehem  and 
Calvary,  yet  see  more  of  that  light  which  floods 
a  world  and  has  no  other  source  than  Jesus  ;  and 
so  will  they  know  as  we  cannot  the  fullness  of 
the  blessing  that  was  in  Him. 

But  let  us  take  another  line  of  argument  from 
the  character  of  Christ. 

When  the  name  of  Jesus  is  named  it  awakens 
a  distinct  conception  of  a  perfect  character.  We 
all  mean  thereby  a  picture  that  exists  in  our 
minds,  which  is  the  world's  supreme  possession, 
the  theme  of  the  poet,  the  effort  of  the  artist, 
the  model  of  the  teacher,  the  ideal  of  the  Chris- 
tian. 

Now,  note  some  features  of  this  character,  as- 
sociated with  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ. 

It  is  faultless.  Unbelievers  no  less  than  dis- 
ciples agree  that  Jesus  was  perfect ;  perfect  in 
joy,  perfect  in  suffering,  perfect  in  His  relations 
with  all  who  met  Him  and  with  whom  He  had  to 
do.  We  know  that,  in  any  conceivable  emer- 
gency, He  would  have  acted  as  He  did  in  those 
that  are  recorded.  That  is,  His  character,  and 
His  alone,  is  a  model.  He  alone  is  copiable.  We 
hold  Him  up  to  our  children  and  only  ask  that 


78      WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY? 

they  may  imitate  Him.  We  know  for  ourselves 
that  we  should  need  no  more,  if  we  could  be 
such  as  He  was  in  this  world.  When  we  would 
seek  to  influence  others  about  us,  we  endeavor  to 
arouse  this  same  desire  in  them,  and  the  effort 
to  better  men  is  but  to  render  them  like  Him, 
as  sufficient  to  regenerate  society  and  to  trans- 
form the  world. 

Again,  it  is  a  catholic  model  of  character. 
There  is  no  one,  man,  woman,  or  child  who  can- 
not learn  of  Him  and  would  not  be  better  for 
doing  so.  And  this  is  true  of  no  one  else.  No 
actual  life,  if  this  is  supposed  not  to  be  such,  can 
be  made  a  model.  All  others  have  their  limita- 
tions as  to  age  or  locality ;  even  if  actually  copi- 
able  in  any  one  place  or  time,  they  would  not 
be  sufficient  as  universal  ideals.  The  Buddhist 
could  not  ask  to  be  only  like  his  Sakya  Muni ; 
it  would  not  be  a  sufficient  light  for  Asia.  We 
know  that  neither  he  nor  any  other  teacher 
would  suffice  as  a  guide  in  the  infinite  variations 
of  human  experience.  Yet  this  is  the  case  with 
this  Jesus.  Whether  high  or  low,  rich  or  poor, 
on  island  or  on  continent,  in  dark  or  in  brilliant 
ages,  the  imitation  of  Christ  is  always  feasible, 
and  a  source  of  betterment  and  comfort.  There 
are  many  kinds  of  saints  in  the  Christian  calen- 
dar, saints  of  every  clime  and  every  age  and 
every  circumstance,  yet  they  all  are  such  because 
they  learned  of  Him  and  copied  in  their  lives  the 
spirit  of  His  own. 


WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY?     yg 

For,  again,  this  conception  of  a  perfect  char- 
acter copiable  by  all,  is  found  in  all  parts  of 
Christendom.  It  is  not  confined  to  the  more 
advanced  Churches  ;  it  is  found  undefined  yet 
real  in  the  most  degraded,  in  those  of  Asia  as 
in  that  of  England.  All  call  this  Jesus  Lord, 
and,  however  gropingly  they  walk,  all  press  to- 
wards Him  as  the  faultless  One.  These  various 
Churches  have  been  severed,  without  communi- 
cation, for  ages ;  sometimes  hostile  and  antago- 
nistic, interested  in  finding  weak  points  in  each 
other,  learning  nothing  from  each  other.  Yet 
they  all  adore  one  Jesus,  have  the  same  model 
for  conduct,  possess  this  same  treasure  of  a  per- 
fect character  as  an  example. 

Now,  what  is  the  origin  of  this  universal  idea 
of  a  Jesus,  alone  perfect,  alone  copiable  by  all 
the  children  of  men  ?  Plainly  there  are  only  two 
alternatives.  Either  such  a  life  was  lived,  of 
which  we  have  the  story,  or  else  the  whole  is  a 
fiction.  Either  Jesus  was  historically  real,  or 
this  character  is  the  invention  of  man  in  the  cen- 
turies of  the  past. 

Was  it  possibly  an  invention  ?  Could  human 
skill  have  constructed  such  a  character  ?  To  as- 
certain this  is  not  very  difficult,  for  we  may  know 
what  man  can  do  by  what  he  has  done.  He  has 
done  a  great  deal  in  the  way  of  depicting  imag- 
inary as  well  as  real  characters.  His  highest  in- 
tellectual work  has  perhaps  been  in  this  line. 
We  know  how  much  labor  has  been  expended  in 


80      WAS   CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY? 

biography,  both  in  concealing  the  defects,  and  in 
heightening  the  virtues,  of  those  whom  the  inter- 
est or  affection  of  disciples  or  admirers  has  rep- 
resented as  models  for  others  to  follow  ;  and  also 
how  men  have  eagerly  sought  out  such  lives  as 
could  be  delineated  for  imitation.  But,  further, 
look  at  the  mental  power  exercised  in  character 
painting  in  fiction,  whether  in  the  poem,  the 
drama,  the  moral  treatise,  or  the  novel.  Plato, 
Shakespeare,  Scott,  Corneille,  are  names  that 
recall  noble  endeavors  to  give  us  ideals  of  hu- 
manity. Now,  what  is  the  result  of  all  this,  the 
work  of  giants  ?  It  is  that  not  one  has  given  us 
a  perfect  character,  or  a  catholic  one,  one  so  liv- 
ing and  acting  and  speaking  in  varying  expe- 
riences, that  we  can  accept  it  as  a  sufficient 
ideal  for  our  children,  or  for  this  wide  world  with 
its  countless  forms  of  sorrow,  of  weakness,  and 
of  imperfection.  Or  even  if  any  such  fictitious 
character  were  a  model  where  the  author  dwelt, 
it  would  be  unsuited  to  the  nearest  nation ;  in- 
comprehensible, perhaps  absurd,  to  whole  realms 
of  distant  people.  In  the  Walhalla  of  man's 
creations,  as  well  as  in  that  of  his  biographies, 
Jesus  Christ  has  no  place.  Among  such  memo- 
rials or  such  fiction  His  isolation  and  their  short- 
comings were  but  intensified.  Thus,  the  percep- 
tion of  what  man  has  done,  at  the  high-water 
mark  of  his  genius,  shows  us  what  is  the  best  he 
can  do,  and  discloses  the  fact  that  he  cannot  in- 
vent a  Christ,  nor  even  develop  a   saint  into  a 


WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL    REALITY?     8 1 

Jesus.  Rousseau  and  Napoleon  both  said,  long 
ago,  the  former  out  of  a  heart  that  was  surely 
unfriendly  enough  to  Christianity,  that  they  knew 
man,  and  his  capacities,  and  that  the  invention 
by  him  of  such  a  character  as  Jesus  would  be  a 
greater  miracle  than  its  reality. 

The  fact  is  that  he  does  not  really  mean  it 
who  says  that  this  character  has  been  invented. 
It  is  a  flippant  utterance  upon  which  he  has  not 
reflected,  or  he  would  see  that  what  it  involves 
is  impossible  ;  that  it  has  no  more  weight  as  an 
argument  than  to  say  that,  because  man  makes 
ice  by  machinery,  or  constructs  a  mill  -  dam  in 
some  river,  the  Mer  de  Glace  or  the  Falls  of 
Niagara  may  have  been  due  to  his  skill.  It  is  an 
assertion  that  carries  weight  only  with  those 
who  are  too  ignorant  to  know,  or  too  superficial 
to  consider,  the  limitations  of  human  capacity. 

And  yet  there  are  some  who  will  actually  have 
us  believe,  as  reasonable  men,  that  this  picture, 
which  is  enshrined  in  Christendom,  the  beauty 
of  which  the  human  intellect  despairs  to  equal 
in  its  fictions,  and  the  saint  to  reproduce  in  his 
life,  the  copying  of  which  is  the  only  way  to 
advance  in  grace  of  character,  and  which  is  the 
only  source  of  inspiration  for  life,  —  they  will  have 
us  believe,  that  this  was  the  creation  of  some 
Jewish  fishermen,  in  an  age  that  was  narrow  and 
bigoted,  who  themselves  had  been  trained  in  the 
most  bigoted  and  narrow  of  its  circumstances. 
This  is  too  much  to  ask  of  us  in  days  when  we 
are  expected  to  be  critical  and  incredulous. 


82      WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL  REALITY? 

But  no,  say  some,  it  was  the  later  creation  of 
the  Church  :  Christians  made  this  character,  by 
a  more  or  less  gradual  process.  But  what  made 
them  Christians  ?  What  made  them  such  peo- 
ple as  could  evolve  such  an  ideal  out  of  their  fer- 
tile minds  ?  There  seems  to  be  no  reply  but 
that  a  Christ  must  have  first  made  Christians 
those  who  could  invent  a  Christ  ;  and  if  Chris- 
tendom made  this  Jesus,  why  has  it  not  made 
another  ?  Why,  in  all  its  literature,  with  all  its 
advance  since  its  lowly  origin,  has  it  not  been 
able  to  give  us  some  other  fictitious  life  equally 
ideal  ?  Or  why  is  it  that  the  Church  has  not  yet 
grown  up  to  realize,  in  a  single  member,  this  an- 
cient fiction ;  has  never  yet  produced  a  real 
Christ  in  the  strength  of  its  maturity,  if  it  could 
create  an  ideal  Christ  in  the  weakness  of*  its  in- 
fancy ?  Why  is  it  that  the  highest  attainment 
of  all  its  saints  has  been  but  the  partial  repro- 
duction of  this  story  ?  Surely,  there  is  no  ex- 
planation of  all  this,  if  the  Jesus  of  the  Church 
was  but  the  evolution  of  its  early  and  ignorant 
days.  There  is  no  reason  to  expect  any  attain- 
ment of  such  an  ideal  in  the  future  thought  or 
life  of  Christendom  ;  still  it  were  easier  to  be- 
lieve that  Christendom  might  yet  in  its  progress 
reach  such  a  capacity  than  to  believe  that  it  pos- 
sessed it  in  its  beginnings. 

So  then,  if  the  character  of  Jesus  is  not  that 
of  one  who  lived  and  died  and  left  such  a  mem- 
ory, then  the  only  alternative  is  the  impossible 


WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY?     8$ 

one  that  it  is  an  invention  of  men,  and  of  such 
men  as  we  have  said.  Either  Christ  made  the 
Church  or  the  Church  made  Christ.  The  latter 
is  a  supposition  that  exceeds  the  wildest  credu- 
lity of  superstition,  surpasses  the  absurdity  of 
the  fairy  tales  that  children  in  the  nursery,  or 
the  peasants  of  ignorant  lands,  believe.  In  pres- 
ence of  this  character  of  Jesus,  we  can  only  say 
that  it  is  due  to  a  life  once  lived  ;  that  we  have 
a  description  of  a  person..  Jesus  Christ  was  an 
historical  reality. 

Once  more,  let  us  see  the  evidence  of  things 
with  which  we  are  familiar,  the  Church  and  its 
institutions.  This  is  an  argument  so  conclusive 
that  it  is  strange  how  any  doubt  can  be  raised  as 
to  the  actuality  of  the  person  of  Christ.  It  is 
like  my  friend's  asking  the  evidence  of  the  real- 
ity of  Charles  the  Great  in  a  structure  built  by 
him  and  rich  in  his  memorials.  It  is  like  asking 
proof  for  the  reality  of  William  the  Conqueror 
in  presence  of  English  history,  or  for  the  reality 
of  the  Pilgrim  Fathers  at  Plymouth,  or  of  George 
Washington  in  our  own  land,  or  of  Michael  An- 
gelo  in  the  Duomo  of  Florence.  These  things 
presuppose  the  persons,  are  their  work,  tell  of 
them  ;  and  so  the  Church  is  a  monument,  a  fabric, 
that  tells  of  Christ,  and  proclaims  that  it  was 
originated  for  that  purpose.  No  argument  that 
can  be  urged,  no  evidence  that  can  be  adduced, 
whether  documents,  or  books,  or  monuments  of 
any  other  sort,  is  so  conclusive  as  this,  a  society 


84     WAS   CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY? 

that  sprang  from  His  creation.  That  is,  when 
the  Church  is  pointed  out  to  one  who  asks  the 
reasons  for  believing  that  Jesus  actually  lived 
and  died,  and  rose,  his  demanding  documentary, 
or  any  other,  proof  besides,  is  like  a  man  who 
lives  in  the  new  world  that  was  discovered  by 
Columbus,  asking  to  see  documents  to  prove  that 
Columbus  was  a  real  man. 

Yet,  there  is  a  peculiarity  about  this  argument 
which  does  distinguish  it  from  the  analogies 
that  have  been  cited.  The  relation  of  Christ  to 
the  Church  is  closer  than  that  of  conqueror,  or 
pilgrim,  or  discoverer,  to  his  work.  When  we 
come  to  analyze  the  latter,  we  find  other  factors 
mingled  in  their  history.  There  were  other  dis- 
coverers who  cooperated  with  Columbus,  other 
patriots  who  shared  with  Washington  in  the 
foundation  of  our  liberties,  other  pilgrims  than 
those  who  landed  on  the  historic  Rock  ;  and  we 
can  plausibly  claim  honor  for  other  names  than 
these,  as  we  consider  historical  events.  But,  as 
to  the  Church,  there  is  no  one  but  Christ  to 
whom  its  origin  can  be  attributed.  It  tells  of 
Him  alone.  His  reality  stands  as  its  only  foun- 
dation. It  is  easier  to  believe  that  any  one  else 
than  a  Dante  wrote  the  Divine  Comedy  than  to 
believe  that  any  one  else  than  a  Jesus  originated 
the  Church  ;  easier  to  believe  that  some  noble 
fabric  that  has  its  builder's  name  on  corner-stone 
and  pinnacle  is  inscribed  with  an  untruth,  than 
that  the  fabric  of  the   Church,  written  all  over 


WAS   CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY?     85 

with  the  name  of  Jesus,  proclaims  a  falsehood. 
We  can  separate  the  architect  from  his  work. 
We  cannot  separate  Christ  from  the  Church. 

This  same  principle  of  sufficient  and  appro- 
priate reason,  or  cause  and  effect,  applies  to  the 
institutions  of  Christianity,  of  which  we  select 
three. 

One  is  Baptism.  This  is  an  ordinance  of  effus- 
ing or  immersing,  with  the  use  of  water,  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 
Ghost,  with  the  declaration  that  it  was  estab- 
lished by  Jesus  as  the  mode  of  initiation  into  His 
Church.  It  is  not  only  now,  but  it  has  always 
been  used  for  this  purpose,  and  with  this  decla- 
ration. Furthermore,  there  have  been,  from 
the  first,  disputes  about  the  value  and  methods 
of  it.  There  have  been  sects  and  parties  and 
persons  interested  in  doing  away  with  its  use 
and  obligation.  Yet  it  continues,  in  all  lands 
and  divisions  of  Christendom,  as  a  thing  so  man- 
ifestly handed  down  from  a  Christ  who  estab- 
lished it,  so  palpably  assignable  but  to  Him,  and 
bearing  on  the  face  of  it  such  tokens  of  His  be- 
ing its  deviser  and  appointer,  that  no  Christians 
have  dared  to  dispense  with  it  except  a  few  in- 
significant sects  which  either  are  now  extinct,  or 
are  fast  dying  out.  Now,  only  a  real  Christ  can 
have  founded  a  rite  that  has  been  such  a  factor  in 
the  religious  life,  or  that  would  not  have  died  out 
ere  this,  as  so  many  practices  have  done,  which 
in  themselves  seemed  more  likely  to  endure. 


86      WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY? 

Again,  consider  the  Lord's  Supper.  This  is 
a  curious  ceremony  for  the  chief  religious  act  of 
Christendom,  and  for  such  lands  and  days  as  our 
own.  It  is  eating  bread  and  drinking  wine  in 
our  assemblies,  a  sort  of  meal  in  Church.  It 
purports  to  have  been  instituted  by  Jesus  Christ, 
on  the  eve  of  His  crucifixion,  for  the  purpose, 
among  other  things,  of  keeping  fresh  the  remem- 
brance of  Him  and  His  death.  A  part  of  the 
ceremony  is,  and  always  has  been,  rehearsing  the 
alleged  story  of  its  appointment  at  the  time  to 
which  it  refers.  Old  liturgies  that  we  possess, 
from  a  brief  period  after  that  date,  contain  this 
rehearsal,  as  well  as  those  of  to-day.  There 
have  been  also  special  controversies  about  this 
rite.  Christendom  has  been  divided  upon  its 
details,  yet  all  have  clung  to  the  ceremony  as 
coming  to  each  independently  of  the  rest. 

Now,  is  it  not  unreasonable  to  ask  us  to  believe 
that  a  holy  ordinance,  one  that  is  so  ancient, 
coming  to  so  many  different  lands  by  separate 
lines  of  transmission,  one  that  was  used  as  it  is 
now  by  those  who  had  opportunity  to  know,  and 
every  interest  to  proclaim,  the  truth  about  it,  — 
that  such  an  ordinance  rehearses  a  falsehood,  and 
then  bases  thereupon  a  pious  and  prayerful  act 
of  worship  ?  It  is  difficult  to  understand  how  the 
existence  of  any  person  whom  we  have  not  seen 
with  our  own  eyes  can  be  certain,  if  this  unique, 
this  monumental,  ordinance  of  the  Holy  Commu- 
nion does  not  show  the  reality  of  Jesus  Christ. 


WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY?     87 

Consider,  lastly,  the  Lord's  Day,  or  Sunday. 
This,  the  first  day  of  the  week,  is  used  as  we  use 
it  because  the  Church  appointed  it  at  an  early 
date  to  commemorate  the  resurrection  and  the 
triumph  of  the  Church's  Founder. 

It  adds,  therefore,  a  new  fact  to  those  we  have 
more  particularly  dwelt  upon  hitherto,  the  rising 
of  Jesus  from  the  dead.  All  the  arguments  for 
Christianity  involve  this  fact.  The  foundation 
of  the  Church,  the  observance  of  Baptism  and 
of  the  Eucharist,  imply  it,  for  two  reasons.  In 
the  first  place,  a  dead  Christ  could  have  founded 
nothing.  Men  do  not  trust  and  preach  and  urge 
on  others  as  a  Saviour  one  who,  whatever  he  had 
been,  yet  died  and  was  buried  as  other  men.  If 
Calvary  had  been  the  end  of  the  story  of  Jesus, 
there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  story  would 
have  lived  a  hundred  years,  much  less  that  we 
should  ever  have  heard  of  it.  Stories  much 
more  apt  to  endure  have  been  forgotten.  And 
so  this  one,  of  a  life  lived  obscurely  in  an  ob- 
scure land,  without  leaving  a  line  of  writing  or  a 
single  relic,  followed  by  such  convulsions  as  those 
that  came  over  the  land  where  it  was  lived,  sweet 
as  it  was,  would  have  been  forgotten  when  the 
children  had  died  to  whom  fathers  might  have 
told  it,  unless,  after  the  disappointment  of  its 
end,  Jesus  had  reappeared  to  send  out  those  who 
should  perpetuate  it.  His  disciples  went  back 
from  Jerusalem  to  their  homes  and  fishing  nets, 
and   they   would  have  stayed  there,  if  a   risen 


88      WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY? 

Jesus  had  not  called  them  to  His  work  again. 
The  Church  as  an  organization  would  never  have 
existed,  for  the  memory  of  a  martyr  does  not 
found  a  thing  like  that.  But,  more  than  this, 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus  cannot  be  separated 
from  His  story.  We  know  no  Jesus  but  the 
risen  Jesus.  The  only  sources  whence  we  learn 
that  He  lived  tell  us  that  He  rose.  If  we  do 
not  believe  the  evidence  of  His  resurrection,  we 
have  no  reason  to  believe  that  He  ever  existed. 
The  only  reason  for  believing  that  He  uttered 
the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  is  a  testimony  that 
tells  of  His  victory  over  the  grave.  The  idea  of 
a  Jesus  that  died  and  did  not  rise  is  unknown 
to  any  but  a  few  credulous  skeptics.  It  has  no 
historical  warrant  of  any  kind.  Consistency  may 
lead  to  denying  both,  but,  if  one  is  believed,  the 
evidence  for  that  is  as  strong  for  the  other.  It 
is  either  to  no  Christ  or  to  a  risen  Christ,  that 
we  must  come  at  last. 

Now,  the  Lord's  Day  is  a  special  witness  of 
this.  Here  is  one  day  of  the  week,  observed  all 
through  the  ages,  in  lands  that  have  had  no  con- 
nection, in  Churches  as  wide  apart  as  India  and 
Africa  and  Britain,  and  that  have  been  willing  to 
receive  nothing  from  each  other ;  which  says  of 
itself  that  it  is  set  apart  to  be  the  day  for  Chris- 
tians to  express  their  joy  for  the  resurrection 
that  completed  and  assured  their  redemption. 
How  can  the  day  be  accounted  for  if  this  testi- 
mony is  not  true  ?    How  can  such  a  festival  come 


WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY?     89 

into  being  if  the  fact  did  not  occur  ?  How  can 
it,  with  all  its  antiquity,  and  all  its  memories, 
bear  a  lie  upon  its  face  ?  It  is  more  conceivable 
that  the  local  festival  of  the  Fourth  of  July  is 
the  commemoration  of  an  event  that  never  oc- 
curred than  that  this  universal  festival  of  Chris- 
tendom is  the  memorial  of  what  never  took 
place. 

But  still  further.  This  day  is  ostensibly  the 
substitution  of  the  first  day  of  the  week  as  the 
holy  day,  in  place  of  the  seventh,  because  the 
great  fact  which  happened  upon  it  authorized 
such  a  change  by  the  Church.  Now  we  have 
means  of  knowing  that  such  a  change  was  made. 
The  Jews  still  keep  the  last  day,  Saturday,  as  the 
sacred  one  of  the  seven.  They  are  still  six  days 
behind  us  in  their  religious  services,  and  charge 
us  with  an  unauthorized  alteration  in  this  respect. 
That  is,  the  use  of  Sunday  was  a  revolution. 
Now,  how  can  this  revolution  and  its  success  be 
accounted  for  unless  there  was  reason  for  it  in 
an  event  considered  sufficient  to  warrant  it  ? 
This  abiding  difference  between  us  and  the  Jews 
shows  the  reality  of  the  cause  that  led  to  it. 

So  do  all  these  lines  of  thought,  based  upon 
present,  palpable  facts,  arguments  available  to 
every  one,  show  the  historical  reality  of  the 
career  of  Jesus  Christ.  It  lies  behind  all  our 
civilization  no  less  than  behind  all  our  Christian- 
ity, as  its  cause  and  origin.  It  is  the  one  fact  on 
the  forefront  of  the  world. 


90      WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY? 

But  some,  whose  minds  are  peculiarly  consti- 
tuted, hesitate  to  assent  to  all  this  because  of  a 
hypothesis  that  they  raise  without  perceiving 
what  it  involves.  They  say  that  our  argument 
rests  upon  the  trustworthiness  of  the  founders 
of  the  Church.  They  are  not  prepared  to  say 
that  these  founders  were  deceivers,  so  they  ask, 
may  not  these  men  have  been  deluded  ?  Now 
this  does  not  apply  to  the  argument  from  the 
blessings  conferred  by  Christ,  nor  to  that  from 
His  character :  they  are  untouched  by  any  such 
hypothesis  ;  yet  it  is  conceivably  the  case  as  to 
the  foundation  of  the  Church  and  its  institutions. 
That  is,  we  may  say  it  is  speculatively  possible 
that  Christianity  was  originated  by  men  who 
were  convinced  that  Christ  lived  and  died  and 
rose  as  they  taught,  but  who  were  under  a  great 
hallucination.  But  practically  this  does  not  help 
the  doubter.  Our  reply  to  him  is  that  it  is  an 
inadmissible  supposition  to  conscientious  and 
reasonable  men,  and  more  improbable  than  what 
it  opposes. 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  an  impugnment,  for 
which  there  is  no  warrant,  of  the  intelligence  of 
such  men  as  John  and  Paul  and  their  compan- 
ions, who  did  such  a  work  and  showed  such  de- 
votion unto  death.  There  is  no  justification  for 
such  an  attack  upon  their  sagacity,  no  ground  for 
saying  that  they  are  not  just  as  trustworthy  as 
any  other  men  upon  whom  we  rely  for  matters 
that  we  have  not  ourselves  seen. 


WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL  REALITY?     9 1 

Again,  if  we  say  they  were  deluded,  we  make 
them  the  authors  of  Christianity.  Then  all  the 
blessings  of  light  and  hope  and  redemption  that 
it  has  brought  are  due  to  them.  Then  they  have 
done  for  us  what  we  ask  and  wish  from  God. 
They  are  gods  to  us.  They  are  saviors.  Then 
let  us  worship  them  ;  for,  if  it  is  they  who  have 
shown  such  love  and  such  power,  they  deserve  it, 
and  no  one  else  can  claim  it  more  rightly. 

But,  still  again,  there  is  then  no  gospel.  If 
what  we  call  such  is  the  work  of  hallucinated 
men,  then  it  is  only  speculation,  only  guesswork, 
and  instead  of  having  something  to  rest  upon,  as 
we  had  fondly  hoped,  we  are  thrown  back  upon 
our  old  misery.  Heaven  is  still  unopened.  No 
voice  has  come  thence.  Our  faith  rests  upon 
delusions.  Our  hope  has  no  foundation.  Sin 
must  still  be  expiated  by  ourselves.  We  must 
still  work  and  struggle  in  our  own  strength. 
And  so  this  reply  of  the  doubter  plunges  a  world 
that  had  begun  to  take  heart  into  unrelieved  de- 
spair. It  has  still  to  wait  for  some  response  to 
all  its  appeals  and  prayers. 

But,  beyond  all  this,  think  what  this  assertion 
or  doubt  implies.  It  means  that  this  world's 
greatest  imposture  has  been  its  greatest  blessing. 
That  Christianity  has  been  its  greatest  blessing 
is  clear.  It  has  done  what  nothing  else  has  done 
to  relieve  the  ills  and  to  lighten  the  darkness  of 
the  world,  to  cheer  our  own  lives,  to  comfort  our 
loved   ones,  to  hallow  the    saints    of   the   ages. 


92      WAS   CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY? 

Yet,  if  the  work  of  deluded  men,  it  is  a  fraud, 
and  the  supremest  fraud  in  all  earth's  history. 
No  lie  has  ever  had  such  a  power,  no  hallucina- 
tion such  a  sway. 

Now  this  cannot  be  allowed  to  be  possible.  It 
is  immoral,  it  is  opposed  to  conscience,  it  is 
wrong,  to  say  that  all  the  benefits  of  the  gospel 
can  be  due  to  a  delusion.  For  it  means  that 
the  false  can  work  for  human  good  better  than 
the  true.  Then  why  seek  for  truth  ?  Then,  con- 
sistently, we  must  ask,  not  what  is  true,  but 
what  will  apparently  work  well  ?  Let  us  seek  de- 
lusions and  ignore  verities.  The  man  who  says 
this  with  which  we  are  dealing  affirms  therein, 
not  only  that  truth  cannot  be  found,  but  that  it 
would  be  love's  labor  lost  if  found,  since  it  has 
no  superior  value  over  a  deception.  He  affirms 
that  it  is  just  as  well  to  teach  falsehoods  as  facts. 
This  is  to  doubt  the  reality  of  right  and  wrong. 
And  furthermore,  if  it  can  happen  that  the  great- 
est of  benefits  to  others  and  ourselves  can  ensue 
upon  an  unequaled  fraud,  then  why  trouble  our- 
selves to  act  rightly  ?  If  it  has  happened  so 
once,  in  a  great  instance,  why  may  it  not  again 
in  our  own  cases  ?  Why  is  it  not  probable  that 
it  will  ?  When  one  says,  "  I  will  do  evil  that 
good  may  come,"  we  can  only  reply  that  good  can- 
not come  from  evil,  and  that  the  man  who  acts  on 
that  principle  is  immoral.  Yet,  if  this  hypothe- 
sis of  which  we  are  speaking  be  true,  we  cannot 
give  that  reply.     We  must  say  that  perhaps  it  is 


WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL  REALITY?     93 

as  well  to  do  evil  as  to  do  good,  that  one  need 
not  concern  himself  about  his  conduct,  his  influ- 
ence, his  work,  his  teaching,  if  deluded  men  have 
been  the  world's  highest  benefactors  by  a  fraud, 
innocent  though  they  were  of  evil  intent. 

So  we  answer  the  objection  that  perhaps  the 
Church  was  founded  upon  mistaken  affirmations 
of  some  men  as  to  Jesus,  that  it  involves  inadmis- 
sible suppositions,  and  is  impossible  to  those  who 
believe  that  good  and  evil  are  different  things, 
that  one  must  do  right  and  must  not  do  wrong, 
that  sin  and  error  injure,  and  righteousness  and 
truth  benefit,  us  and  our  neighbor.  It  is  no 
relief  to  the  perplexed,  or  to  one  who  feels  the 
force  of  doubt,  for  it  is  harder  to  believe  than 
Christianity  itself ;  and  to  teach  it  is  to  break 
the  moorings  for  the  lives  and  characters  of  our- 
selves, our  children,  and  our  fellow-men. 

Yet,  notice  this.  If  you  cannot  accept  this 
alternative  there  is  no  other.  To  this  point  the 
discussion  has  now  attained.  All  thoughtful 
skeptics  concede  that  one  must  either  believe 
as  the  Church  does,  or  explain  Christianity  by 
this  theory  of  delusion,  and  as  being,  therefore, 
a  fraud.  They  declare  that  there  is  no  other  re- 
lief. Unless  you  agree  with  us,  say  they,  you 
must  agree  with  the  Christendom  of  the  past. 

So  we  sum  up.  The  establishment  of  the 
Church  by  men  whom  we  cannot  suppose  de- 
luded without  imperiling  all  righteousness,  the  in- 
stitutions that  bear  the  name  of  Christ  on  their 


94      WAS  CHRIST  AN  HISTORICAL   REALITY? 

front,  the  character  that  is  manifestly  beyond 
human  capacity  to  create,  the  blessings  that  can 
be  traced  to  no  other  source,  —  all  these  facts 
make  it  sure,  as  no  other  event  is  sure  in  all  hu- 
man history,  that  that  is  true  which  the  Church 
proclaims  regarding  Jesus  ;  and  we  know  that  in 
staking  our  hopes  for  time  and  for  eternity  upon 
Him,  we  are  resting  upon  that  which  cannot  be 
shaken,  we  are  reposing  upon  the  one  certain 
thing  amid  the  uncertainties  of  the  past,  our 
feet  are  on  the  Rock  of  Ages. 


LECTURE   IV. 

WHO    WAS   JESUS    CHRIST? 

"The  Word  was  made  flesh  and  dwelt  among  us."  —  yohn 
i.  14. 

We  have  seen  that  Christianity  is  a  revelation 
of  comforting  and  saving  facts  regarding  God's 
provision  for  our  needs,  made  in  the  person  and 
career  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  lived,  died,  and  rose, 
as  the  Church  was  founded  to  proclaim. 

Now,  who  is  He  that  has  done  all  this  for  us  ? 
The  question  is  important,  most  obviously,  and 
is  shown  to  be  so  by  the  very  discussions  re- 
garding it.  It  was  agitated  for  centuries  by  the 
keenest  and  holiest  of  minds.  "  What  think  ye 
of  Christ  ?"  is  to-day  the  great  theme  of  thought 
and  controversy,  and  among  men  and  women  who 
do  not  take  such  trouble  about  trifles.  It  is  im- 
portant because,  as  disputants  have  seen,  very 
extensive  consequences  depend  upon  the  answer 
that  is  given.  The  whole  form  and  character  of 
Christianity,  that  is,  of  that  religious  life  of  the 
world  about  us  which  is  the  hope  of  the  rest  of 
the  world,  will  be  affected  by  the  conceptions 
that  are  held  of  Him  upon  whom  that  religious 
life  rests.      It  is  very  well  to  say,  and  there  is 


g6  WHO    WAS  JESUS  CHRIST? 

undoubtedly  some  truth  in  it,  that  the  great  thing 
is  to  follow  Christ,  and  that  our  views  of  Him 
are  secondary.  It  is  true  that  orthodoxy  has 
often  given  the  impression  that  the  prime  con- 
cern is  to  think  of  Him  rightly,  and  that  right 
discipleship  is  of  comparatively  slight  moment. 
It  is  nevertheless  true  that  the  question  as  to 
His  rank  in  the  scale  of  being  is  not  a  fruitless, 
unpractical  inquiry,  for  the  character  of  our  dis- 
cipleship will  depend  upon  our  opinion  of  Him 
who  is  our  Lord  and  Master.  Is  is  also  true 
that  the  nature  of  our  trust  will  depend  upon  our 
conceptions  of  Him  whom  we  trust.  The  degree 
to  which  we  have  confidence  in  the  facts  dis- 
closed will  accord  with  our  conviction  as  to  the 
position  of  Him  who  discloses  them.  Faith  is 
altogether  conditioned  by  its  opinion  of  its  ob- 
ject. It  has  therefore  been  seen  in  history,  and 
may  be  seen  now,  that  the  color,  the  shape,  the 
permanence,  the  peace,  of  Christianity  are  con- 
nected with  the  answer  to  our  inquiry. 

And  so  all  this  discussion  has  been  due  to  a 
desire  to  avoid  error  and  reach  truth  in  so  im- 
portant an  issue.  All  earnest  men  wish  their 
religious  beliefs  and  hopes  to  be  well  founded 
and  sincere,  since  Jesus  Christ  is  inseparable 
from  Christianity,  inseparable  to  us  from  reli- 
gion. Since  the  issue  is  forced  upon  us  in  books 
and  magazines  and  newspapers,  and  by  lectures, 
we  must  meet  it.  We  must  recognize  its  signif- 
icance and  deal  with  it,  unless  we  are  utterly  in- 


WHO  WAS  JESUS  CHRIST?  97 

different  to  the  great  concerns  at  stake.  It  does 
not  satisfy  to  say  that  the  solution  is  beyond  us. 
True,  we  cannot  pretend  to  reach  it  perfectly. 
All  lives  are  mysteries  and  run  up  into  mystery. 
Much  more  is  such  a  life,  especially  from  the 
stand-point  of  the  Church.  Theology  has  too 
often  alienated  seekers  by  apparently  claiming  to 
make  final  formulae  of  deep  things,  to  understand 
God  and  man,  and  to  explain  their  union,  whether 
in  sanctification,  in  providence,  or  in  Incarnation  ; 
but  the  Church  is  committed  to  no  such  presump- 
tuousness.  It  knows  that  its  Lord's  being  is  a  ful- 
ler, richer  thing  than  can  ever  be  fathomed.  And 
so,  none  but  erratics,  or  would  be  Titans,  claim 
to  have  scaled  the  heights  opened  by  the  contem- 
plation of  Christ.  Yet  these  heights  can  be  as- 
cended, up  to  reasonable  limits.  We  may  expect 
to  learn,  to  some  extent,  what  can  and  what  can- 
not be  known.  We  can  hope  to  gain  some  fixed 
points  in  the  inquiry  regarding  the  nature  even 
of  this  Saviour,  before  whom  the  world  stands 
in  reverence,  and  the  Church  in  faith,  sufficient 
to  enable  us  to  say,  not  exhaustively,  yet  truly, 
who  and  what  He  is.  With  such  data  as  are  at 
its  command  we  must  surely  grant  this  much  to 
human  intelligence,  however  humble  be  our  esti- 
mate of  it. 

Perhaps  our  inquiry  may  be  best  conducted  by 
discussing  the  answer  that  Christendom  has 
reached,  and  then  setting  forth  its  verification. 

The  Church  declares  that  this  historical  per- 


98  WHO  WAS  JESUS  CHRIST? 

sonage,  Jesus  Christ,  is  "  God  manifest  in  the 
flesh  ;  "  that  behind  that  human  life  was  a  divine 
personality ;  yet  that  He  was  not  the  Father,  but 
the  second  of  a  Trinity  in  the  divine  Unity,  in- 
carnate in  humanity ;  the  divine  Being  having 
such  threefoldness  that  this  Incarnation  is  both 
a  possibility,  and  a  manifest  reality. 

This  is  what  the  Church,  and  all  Christians, 
save  an  inconsiderable  few,  have  held  since 
thought  dealt  with  and  answered  the  question  we 
are  considering.  It  is  the  form  in  which  the 
gospel  has  been  made  known,  has  done  its  work, 
and  is  clung  to  to-day.  Not  only  does  the  preva- 
lence of  this  answer  warrant  our  studying  the 
theme  by  starting  from  it,  as  having  the  pre- 
sumption in  its  favor,  but  it  shows  the  issue  to 
be  met.  The  alternative  presented  is  tremen- 
dous. If  this  belief  is  a  mistake,  then  Chris- 
tianity has  been  involved  in  a  stupendous  error  ; 
has  been,  and  is,  fundamentally  wrong.  For  it 
vitiates  everything  else  to  err  radically  on  the 
nature  of  Deity.  Then  no  feature  of  the  gospel 
can  continue  to  stand  as  it  is  now  held,  since 
every  other  part  is  affected  by  this  one.  Every 
phase  of  objective  and  subjective  Christianity 
must  be  changed  if  there  is  error  here ;  and  all 
Christendom,  all  Christian  life  and  thought,  are 
condemned,  as  fostering  a  delusion  that  is  a  blas- 
phemy. On  the  other  hand,  if  this  view  of 
Christ  is  true,  the  denial  of  it  is  an  equally  stu- 
pendous error,  and  is  a  loss  that  is  without  equal, 


WHO  WAS  JESUS   CHRIST?  99 

for  it  means  the  rejection  of  the  vision  of  God 
among  men,  denial  that  God  was  in  Christ  re- 
conciling the  world  unto  Himself. 

In  studying  this  subject,  it  will  help  us  to  as- 
certain first  how  this  conclusion  was  reached  ; 
for  it  is  possible  with  little  technicality  of  terms 
to  tell  to  any  one  the  story  of  the  process. 

I  call  it  a  process,  for  such  it  was.  There  is 
no  doubt  as  to  the  rank  that  the  Church  from 
the  first  accorded  to  its  Lord.  Christians  loved 
and  adored  Him,  sung  praises  and  uttered  pray- 
ers to  Him,  declared  in  their  simple  services  and 
in  their  use  of  the  formula  of  baptism,  their 
ascription  to  Him  of  supreme  lordship.  But, 
very  naturally,  this  belief  entered  into  their  life 
before  they  asked  and  thought  how  it  was  true. 
They  did  not  at  first  labor  at  the  question,  how 
can  He  be  such  ?  How  is  this  lordship  to  be 
harmonized  with  the  truth  about  the  unity  of 
deity  ?  But  they  were  compelled  to  labor  at  it 
very  soon.  From  without  and  from  within  came 
the  question  and  answers,  accompanied  by  ex- 
planations which  had  to  be  weighed,  and  either 
approved  or  condemned.  One  person  or  sect 
after  another  had  its  hypothesis,  and  each  had  to 
be  scrutinized,  whether  it  were  allowable,  accord- 
ing to  the  criteria  that  must  control.  So,  by  a 
process  of  exclusion  of  inadmissible  explanations, 
and  of  adoption  of  necessary  steps  in  advance, 
the  Church  came,  at  length,  to  formulate  its  defi- 
nition of  what  it  understood  by  the  formula  of 


100  WHO  WAS  JESUS   CHRIST? 

baptism,  In  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  of  what  it 
meant  by  Christ  being  the  Son  of  God :  that 
doctrine  to  which  it  has  clung  so  unalterably 
ever  since,  and  which  is  the  one  indestructible 
thing  in  the  changes  and  revolutions  of  Chris- 
tian history. 

Some  tell  us  that  the  matter  cannot  be  viewed 
in  this  way ;  that  it  must  be  settled  by  the  New 
Testament  alone  ;  that  this  belief  can  stand  upon 
no  other  ground.  Some  say  so  who  believe  the 
doctrine  in  question,  and,  undervaluing  the  think- 
ing and  authority  of  the  Church,  assert  that  they 
find  it  in  the  Scriptures  sufficiently  defined.  It 
is  a  pity  that  the  early  Christians  could  not  find 
it  so  definitely  expressed  there,  for  it  would  soon 
have  put  an  end  to  controversy,  and  averted  the 
necessity  of  Councils.  It  would  also  have  ren- 
dered any  words  superfluous  in  the  Creed  be- 
yond the  quotation  of  some  such  texts. 

To  another  class  of  objectors,  who  say  that 
we  must  give  texts  for  our  doctrine  or  not  expect 
them  to  accept  this  belief  of  Christendom,  we 
reply  that  we  regard  ourselves,  and  them,  bound 
to  accept  plain  inferences  from  sufficient  data, 
and  that  necessary  correlation  of  them  which 
holy  thinking  has  made  evident.  We  admit  that 
no  words  can  be  put  on  the  lips  of  people,  as 
of  divine  obligation,  that  are  not  from  divine 
sources  ;  and,  conversely,  we  insist  that  it  is  rea- 
sonable to  expect  acceptance  of  a  definition  based 


WHO  WAS  JESUS  CHRIST?  1 01 

upon  divine  foundations  so  directly  as  is  that  of 
the  Church's  faith. 

For  the  truth  is  that  the  New  Testament  con- 
tains facts  and  statements  that  can  lead  to  no 
other  definition  of  Christ  than  the  one  which 
Christendom  reached,  and  by  which  it  abides, 
while  it  may  contain  no  specific  texts  that  suf- 
ficed to  settle  controversy  between  those  who  took 
different  ground  in  interpreting  the  sacred  writ- 
ings. Some  phraseology  was  needed,  as  the  inter- 
pretation of  Scripture  and  the  expression  of  the 
meaning  of  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  which  would  be 
unmistakable,  to  which  Christendom  would  cling, 
and  to  which  all  must  assent  who  would  speak 
for  the  Church  and  claim  its  indorsement  for 
their  teaching.  Let  us  now  trace  the  process 
more  in  detail. 

The  standard  by  which  Christian  thought 
guided  itself  in  this  steering  between  conflicting 
views  is,  of  course,  to  be  noticed  at  the  outset. 
It  was  not  so  simple  as  some  appear  to  imagine. 
The  object  was  to  think  rightly,  both  of  Christ 
and  of  Deity,  and  to  avoid  thinking  wrongly. 
To  this  end,  the  Church  had  the  utterances  of 
Christ  Himself,  and  of  His  Apostles  regarding 
Him,  both  directly  and  indirectly  bearing  upon 
the  theme.  The  former  are  immediate  assertions 
of  His  rank,  the  latter  are  statements  regarding 
the  relation  in  which  His  people  are  to  stand  to- 
wards Him,  as  the  object  of  trust  and  homage. 

This  teaching  came  down  by  tradition  received 


102  WHO  WAS  JESUS   CHRIST? 

from  those  who  had  heard  Him,  and  embodied  in 
the  life  of  Christianity.  It  came  in  the  worship, 
the  services  of  the  Church.  It  came  in  the  Sac- 
raments. These  last  certainly  conveyed  a  very 
distinct  idea  as  to  the  position  which  Jesus  was 
to  be  accorded  in  Christendom,  and  therefore  it 
was  a  fundamental  idea,  not  one  of  later  initia- 
tion. The  teaching  also  came  in  Apostolic  writ- 
ings, which,  as  we  shall  see,  though  not  yet  so 
exclusively  relied  upon  as  they  came  to  be  later, 
still  contained  enough  to  guide  thought  when  it 
would  meet  foes  without,  and  error  within  the 
fold. 

All  this  at  once  excluded  any  idea  that  Jesus 
was  merely  a  man.  There  was  a  slight  attempt 
to  give  such  an  explanation  of  Him,  called  Ebion- 
ism.  It  was  the  view  of  some  Jewish  Christians, 
who  could  not  abandon  their  conceptions  of  God, 
and  thought  that  any  ascription  of  divine  rank 
to  Jesus  conflicted  with  Monotheism.  They  re- 
garded Him  as  the  Messiah,  who  was  miracu- 
lously born,  rose  from  the  dead,  was  sinless  and 
perfectly  inspired,  yet  only  a  man  of  miracle. 
It  may  be  worth  noting,  in  passing,  that  no  Chris- 
tians ever  held  any  lower  view.  Some,  outside 
the  pale,  heathens  and  Jews,  affirmed  that  he 
was  only  a  Jew  born  of  wedlock,  though  unu- 
sually good  and  gifted  ;  but  no  Christian,  none 
who  regarded  Him  as  Master  or  Lord,  did  so,  as 
no  one  ever  can,  for  it  is  absurd  so  to  regard  such 
a  Jesus.    Yet  these  few  Ebionites,  who  did  make 


WHO  WAS  JESUS   CHRIST?  IO3 

Him  a  Saviour,  denied  Him  to  be  of  more  than 
human  rank ;  said  that  He  was  miraculous,  yet  a 
creature.  But  this  view  did  not  spread  nor  live. 
It  was  confined  to  a  few  among  the  Jews.  It 
had  no  foothold  at  all  among  the  Gentiles,  for  it 
was  seen  to  be  incompatible  with  the  utterances 
of  Jesus,  with  the  teachings  of  Apostles,  and 
with  anything  like  that  trust  or  adoration  of 
Him  which  had  been  the  very  characteristic  of 
Christianity  from  the  beginning.  We  must  never 
lose  sight  of  this,  that  primitive  Christianity, 
instead  of  holding  that  our  Lord  was  but  human, 
however  extraordinary,  repudiated  the  idea,  as 
not  to  be  entertained  for  an  instant,  in  the  pres- 
ence of  what  was  known  about  Him  and  His 
work,  as  soon  as  a  sect  arose  from  Jewish  preju- 
dices to  maintain  it  ;  and  this  sect  found  no  place, 
and  died  out  in  a  few  years.  It  has  been  so  ever 
since.  This  conception  of  Christ  was  resusci- 
tated in  recent  times  under  the  name  of  Socin- 
ianism,  but  has  not  been  able  to  live  among 
those  that  pretend  to  believe  in  Him  as  in  any 
sense  a  Redeemer.  It  has  had  on  its  side  ear- 
nest and  gifted  men,  and  has  had  in  its  favor  a 
seeming  simplification  of  great  problems,  yet  no 
Church,  no  sect,  has  adopted  it.  It  has  not  been 
able  to  form  a  sect  for  itself  that  remains  Chris- 
tian, in  the  real  sense,  and  has  gained  no  foot- 
hold in  the  Church  of  baptized  and  believing  peo- 
ple. It  is  found  to  be  so  incompatible  with  the 
very  nature  of  Christian  discipleship,  so  conflict- 


104  WH0  WAS  JESUS   CHRIST? 

ing  with  the  needs  of  religion  instead  of  supply- 
ing them,  that  religious  people  will  have  none  of 
it.  As  unreligious  men  do  not  care  for  it,  since 
they  have  no  reason  to  ask  that  even  this  much 
be  accorded  to  Jesus,  this  conception  of  Him,  a 
friendless  applicant  for  admission  into  human 
thought,  is  again  disappearing  into  the  region  of 
inadmissible  speculations,  as  it  did  when  every 
door  was  closed  upon  it  seventeen  centuries  ago. 

So  it  is  a  fact  that  the  thought  of  the  Church, 
as  soon  as  it  began  to  think,  had  really  no  other 
problem  to  deal  with  than  this,  —  how  can  Christ 
be  God  manifest  in  the  flesh  ?  All  agreed,  save 
the  unimportant  few,  that  divine  rank  belongs  to 
Him,  according  to  the  nature  of  Christianity  and 
its  fundamental  positions.  But  the  issue  how 
that  is  to  be  defined  had  to  be  met.  Various  re- 
plies were  suggested,  and  many  conflicting  ones, 
all  claiming  apostolic  authority  and  Scripture 
teaching  in  their  behalf,  and  Christians  had  to 
settle  which  were  allowable  and  which  were  not, 
in  view  of  loyalty  to  Him,  to  their  conscience, 
and  to  God. 

One  reply  suggested  was  that  He  was  God 
and  nothing  else,  that  His  humanity  was  a  mere 
phantasm,  that  His  apparently  human  expe- 
riences, such  as  being  touched,  being  weary, 
rejoicing,  suffering  and  being  crucified,  were  only 
semblances.  This  was  called  Docetism,  or  the 
hypothesis  of  semblance.  Perhaps  this  was  the 
greatest  danger  that  the  Church  ever  met.     It 


WHO  WAS  JESUS  CHRIST?  105 

spread  so  rapidly  that  at  times,  in  the  second  or 
third  century,  if  the  list  of  the  baptized  had 
been  polled,  it  would  probably  have  had  the 
majority.  This  is  a  very  significant  fact.  It 
shows  how  untrue  it  is  to  say  that  the  Church 
by  a  gradual  process  made  a  man  into  a  God. 
It  shows  that  the  original  impression  made  by 
Jesus  was  such  that  His  disciples  tended  at  the 
first  to  deny  that  He  was  human  at  all;  that 
they  who  lived  nearest  to  Him  had,  not  the 
greater,  but  the  less,  realization  of  His  manhood ; 
and  that  the  work  of  thinking  and  leading  minds 
had  to  be  that  of  persuading  the  mass  of  people 
that  He  was  really  man.  That  is,  instead  of  work- 
ing up  to  the  addition  of  His  Godhead  to  His 
Manhood,  the  actual  process  was  working  down, 
against  Docetic  exaggeration,  to  the  apprehen- 
sion of  his  manhood  :  a  limitation,  not  an  exten- 
sion, of  His  divinity. 

One  evidence  of  all  this  is  seen  in  the  Apos- 
tles' Creed.  Why  was  it  necessary  to  say  that 
Christ  suffered,  was  crucified,  died  and  was  bur- 
ied ?  Because  so  many  denied  these  facts,  af- 
firming that  His  divinity  precluded  them  ;  and 
those  passages  were  put  there  to  prevent  Chris- 
tians being  misled  into  the  denial  of  our  Lord's 
humanity.  They  record  the  fact  that,  while  dis- 
belief in  His  deity  had  never  yet  endangered  the 
Church,  this  error  so  nearly  swamped  it  at  its 
birth  that  the  Creed  had  to  be  so  shaped  as  to 
combat  it. 


106  WHO  WAS  JESUS   CHRIST? 

It  became  clear  that  Docetism  was  untenable. 
All  that  believers  knew  of  Christ,  by  Scripture 
and  tradition  and  common  sense,  all  that  others 
who  had  seen  Him  told  them,  made  it  certain 
that  He  was  human  as  any  one  else  ;  and  conse- 
quently the  question  arose,  how  the  divine  in  Him 
could  be  maintained  while  asserting  His  human- 
ity. And  this  cost  the  keenest  conflicts  that  have 
ever  been  known  in  the  history  of  human  thought, 
the  acutest  discussions  ever  pursued  about  deep 
things. 

There  were  two  principal  views  or  hypotheses 
advanced,  between  which  Christian  thought  had 
to  find  some  middle  ground  that  it  could  stand 
upon. 

One  was  that  view,  very  widely  and  acutely 
urged,  called  Sabellianism,  after  its  chief  expo- 
nent. It  said  that  Christ  was,  in  an  indiscrimi- 
nating  sense,  God,  the  full  manifestation  of  all 
that  can  be  predicated  of  deity.  Some  held  that 
He  whom  we  call  Father  is  the  Eternal,  personal 
deity,  looked  at  as  the  source  of  all  being  ;  then, 
as  manifested  in  the  work  of  Christ,  we  call  Him 
Son  ;  and  in  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  we  call 
Him  by  that  third  name.  Others,  and  most  of 
the  advocates  of  this  opinion,  said  that  deity  is 
originally  not  personal  at  all,  but  only  the  imper- 
sonal absolute,  and  that  Christ  is,  as  is  also  the 
Father,  one  of  the  three  personal  forms  that  this 
absolute  One  assumes  in  succession.  That  is,  all 
this  school  taught  that   the  Triunity  in  God  is 


WHO  WAS  JESUS  CHRIST?  107 

not  a  real  threefoldness,  but  only  one  of  mani- 
festation, —  three  masks  through  which  He  looks 
out  among  us,  who  Himself  is  unitarian,  not 
complex  in  any  sense  or  manner.  This  theory 
had  two  leading  difficulties.  One  was  that,  if 
Christ  revealed  God  as  threefold,  then  He  must 
be  threefold,  or  the  revelation  does  not  reveal  the 
truth  about  Him.  If  anything  is  true  of  the 
Gospel,  it  is  that  it  represents  God  as  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost.  If  He  is  not  such,  but 
only  is  manifested  as  such,  then  we  are  no  wiser 
than  before  ;  on  the  contrary,  we  have  been  mis- 
led. The  other  difficulty  is  that  Christ,  instead 
of  confusing  Himself  with  the  Father  or  the 
Holy  Ghost,  always  distinguishes  between  Them 
and  Himself,  is  sent  by  the  one,  and  sends  the 
other.  These  objections  led  the  Church  to  see 
that  Sabellianism  was  no  relief,  and  not  a  per- 
missible hypothesis,  in  the  discussion  how  Christ 
could  be  God  while  there  is  yet  but  one  true 
God. 

It  would  seem  plausible  to  say  then  that,  if 
Christ  must  not  be  confused  with  the  Father, 
nor  made  synonymous  with  deity,  there  is  no 
alternative  but  to  hold  that  He  must  be  distin- 
guished from  real  deity ;  that,  though  all  the 
homage  and  worship  accorded  Him  may  and 
must  be  continued,  He  is  yet  to  be  excluded 
from  actual  Godhead.  This  was  what  Arius 
and  his  party  affirmed.  In  the  interest  of  what 
Christianity   clearly    demanded,    they    admitted 


108  WHO  WAS  JESUS  CHRIST? 

that  He  was  not  of  human  or  angelic  rank,  but 
higher  than  all,  and  fit  to  be  accorded  supreme 
honors  and  titles  ;  yet  they  held  that  He  is  not 
God  as  the  Father  is  ;  He  is  dependent,  not  self- 
existent.  They  argued  for  this  theory,  not 
merely  upon  the  basis  of  its  being  the  only  alter- 
native to  Sabellianism,  but  from  the  name  "  Son 
of  God,"  affirming  that  if  He  is  Son,  then,  how- 
ever exalted,  He  is  yet  not  of  equal  exaltation 
with  the  Father,  and  could  not  be  ;  He  must  be 
other  than  the  Eternal.  But  this  had  greater 
difficulties  than  the  theory  it  would  supplant. 

It  made  Christ  a  creature,  however  highly  ex- 
alted, and  therefore  unfit  to  be  adored,  unwar- 
ranted in  claiming  that  allegiance  and  that  hom- 
age which  Christians  give  Him,  and  which  was 
the  original  relationship  in  which  He  placed  Him- 
self to  His  people.  It  also  made  one  divine  who 
was  not  actually  such.  It  gave  us  a  godlike  God. 
This  is  polytheism,  after  all ;  and  Christians 
would  not  allow  that  any  one  but  the  Eternal 
could  be  partaker  of  the  divine  characteristics. 
It  also  leads  to  this  dilemma  :  if  Christ  is  not 
true  God,  then  He  cannot  reveal  God,  for  only 
God  can  reveal  God.  It  was  claimed  by  Arian- 
ism  that  Christ  did  this,  yet  it  is  difficult  to  see 
why  we  need  make  Him  more  than  a  mere  man 
if  we  do  not  concede  His  deity,  since  the  most 
exalted  creature  is  no  more  capable  of  revealing 
God  than  the  humblest  ;  and  so  the  assistance 
rendered   to   the  problem    by  Arianism  is  only 


WHO  WAS  JESUS  CHRIST?  IO9 

imaginary.  This  has  been  so  fully  perceived  by 
others  since,  that  an  attempt  to  revive  Arianism 
has  fallen  dead  in  this  century.  It  has  no  ad- 
vantage over  the  complete  denial  of  Christ's 
divinity  ;  it  does  not  relieve  the  difficulty  any 
more  than  its  rival,  Sabellianism.  The  latter  can 
square  with  some  features  of  our  Lord's  story, 
and  some  of  His  utterances.  The  former  is  in 
hopeless  conflict  with  all  that  He  said  and 
claimed.  The  dispute  which  it  raised  turned 
upon  including  or  excluding  an  iota  in  a  Greek 
word,  which  makes  all  the  difference  between 
saying  that  the  Son  was  the  same  as  God,  or 
only  like  God  ;  and  some,  following  Gibbon,  have 
sneered  at  so  much  controversy  over  a  letter. 
But  that  is  true  which  Froude  reports  Carlyle  as 
saying,  that,  though  he  once  likewise  sneered  at 
the  dispute  as  unimportant,  he  yet  came  to  see, 
at  last,  that  in  that  iota  Christianity  itself  was  at 
stake.  If  Arius  had  won,  he  adds,  Christianity 
would  have  dwindled  away  into  a  legend.  For 
this  was  the  issue  :  Was  the  Gospel  a  communi- 
cation and  a  redemption  made  by  a  creature,  or 
by  our  God  ?  If  the  former,  it  had  no  reason  to 
claim  enduring  supremacy ;  it  contained  no  war- 
rant for  our  trust. 

But  now  there  seemed  to  be  a  deadlock,  if 
Christ  was  not  the  same  as  the  Father,  nor  yet 
different  in  rank  and  nature.  To  the  many, 
there  seemed  no  third  alternative.  What  is  to 
be  done?  they  asked.     Is  it  possible  that  room 


HO  WHO  WAS  JESUS   CHRIST? 

for  Christ's  deity  can  be  found  in  the  idea  of 
God  ?  Yes,  said  the  thoughtful  mind  of  the 
Christian  Church,  under  the  lead  of  such  peer- 
less men  as  Origen  and  Athanasius,  it  can. 

What  is  the  true  conception  of  God  ?  It  is 
not  the  heathen  idea  of  an  impersonal  absolute, 
nor  as  some  arbitrary  speculators,  reasoning 
partly  from  Judaism,  but  chiefly  from  philosoph- 
ical assumptions,  affirm,  that  of  a  monad,  a  sim- 
ple, unitarian  being.  It  is  the  conception  of  the 
Eternal  One  as  having  a  threefold,  complex  life. 
This  is  the  only  way  in  which  God  is  made 
known  in  the  Gospel.  It  is  the  form  of  His 
name  into  which  we  are  to  be  baptized.  It  is 
the  way  in  which  He  is  spoken  of,  in  all  the  New 
Testament,  by  Jesus  and  His  Apostles.  So  the 
thought  of  Him  is  not  exhausted  when  we  say 
Father ;  and,  as  would  seem  obvious,  if  words 
have  any  meaning,  the  Son  is  not  only  like  the 
Father,  but  of  the  same  rank  in  the  scale  of 
being,  and  must  be  of  the  same  nature :  not 
created,  but  divine. 

It  was  then  seen  that  the  only  conception  of 
God  given  to  us  in  revelation  is  that  of  unity  in 
threefoldness,  and  that  thus  the  deity  of  Christ, 
which  had  to  be  conceded  if  He  rightly  claimed 
our  homage,  could  be  affirmed  without  making 
Him  identical  with  the  Father  or  the  Holy  Ghost. 
In  this  way  the  dilemma  is  solved  which  other- 
wise would  be  hopeless  indeed. 

This  result  and  conclusion  were  formally  an- 


WHO  WAS  JESUS  CHRIST?  Ill 

nounced  at  the  Council  of  Nice  in  325,  which 
did  not  claim  to  create  the  fact,  or  add  a  doctrine 
to  the  faith  ;  but  did  claim,  as  against  contending 
parties,  that  the  Christian  idea  of  God  is  such 
that  each  of  the  Three  is  to  be  regarded  as 
really  divine,  that  all  Three  form  the  completed 
definition  of  the  Eternal  One,  and  that  thus  the 
Church's  Lord  was  the  incarnation  of  the  Sec- 
ond in  the  undivided  divine  Unity  of  the  Three. 

And  this  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  has  stood 
ever  since,  permanent  in  Christianity.  Reforma- 
tions and  schisms  and  sects  have  not  shaken  it 
in  the  belief  of  Christians.  People  have  given 
it  up,  when  giving  up  Christianity,  but,  with  in- 
significant exceptions,  they  have  not  done  so 
while  believing  in  Christ  as  a  Saviour.  The  rea- 
son is,  of  course,  that  no  Christian  will  be  con- 
tent with  a  Saviour  that  is  less  than  divine,  nor 
concede  Christ  to  be  less  than  He  claims  ;  while 
he  will  neither  confound  Him  with  the  Father 
nor  the  Sanctifier,  for  the  distinction  between 
them  is  obviously  necessary  to  the  religious 
mind.  This  indestructibility  amid  such  divisions 
on  other  points  would  seem  to  be  evidence  of 
its  truth.  At  any  rate,  it  has  been  shown  that 
there  can  be  no  Christianity  without  it  that  can 
work  or  endure. 

And  we  see  how  this  doctrine  was  reached,  a 
matter  about  which  there  is  much  confusion  of 
thought.  It  did  not  come  from  metaphysical 
speculation  that,  as  some  tell  us,  conquered  the 


112  WHO  WAS  JESUS   CHRIST? 

Church  when  it  gave  up  piety  for  philosophy. 
Nor  did  it  come  from  exaggerated  use  of  isolated 
texts.  It  was  the  result  of  a  process  of  inquiry, 
—  How  is  it  that  Christ  is  really  our  Lord  and 
worthy  of  our  adoration  ?  Which  led  to  asking, 
What  is  God  revealed  to  be  in  the  Gospel  ?  That 
is,  study  disclosed  the  truth  which  has  ever  since 
been  accepted,  that  God  as  revealed  to  us  is  three- 
fold in  His  being. 

What  reason  have  we  for  disputing  this  ?  One 
who  does  so  must  claim  that  he  knows  what  God 
is,  apart  from  His  revelation  of  Himself.  This 
is  the  claim  of  some,  by  virtue  of  which  they 
reject  our  belief  and  teach  that  He  is  unitarian 
in  His  life.  But  how  do  they  know  that  their 
idea  is  right  ?  It  has  no  authority.  It  has  never 
been  held  by  any  religion  in  the  world.  All  reli- 
gious belief  apart  from  Christianity  and  its  fore- 
runner, the  faith  of  Israel,  and  the  religion  of 
Mahomet  derived  therefrom,  has  been  pantheistic 
or  polytheistic.  The  only  conception  that  has 
any  value  for  us  is  that  which  He  has  given  us, 
for  we  only  know  God  according  to  what  He  tells 
us  of  Himself,  and  what  is  told  us  is  that  He  is 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  not  any  one  of 
these  alone.  This  is  the  sole  way  in  which  He 
is  presented  to  us  in  the  Gospel,  by  Jesus  or  His 
Apostles,  and  there  is  no  foundation  for  the 
unitarian  idea  but  the  philosophical  speculation 
of  a  Great  First  Cause,  which  indeed  God  is, 
but  which  is  not  the  God  the  Christian  worships 
and  loves. 


WHO  WAS  JESUS   CHRIST?  1 1 3 

But  is  it  verifiable  ?  Is  this  doctrine,  which  is 
so  inseparable  from  the  Incarnation,  more  than 
a  result  of  pious  logic  ?  Can  it  be  shown  to  be 
necessary,  to  candid  minds  ?  These  are  reasona- 
ble questions,  and  Christian  thinkers  have  always 
replied  that  they  can  be  met  to  the  satisfaction 
of  the  religious  conscience.  We  do  not  dwell 
upon  metaphysical  arguments,  such  as  that  God 
cannot  be  conceived  of,  either  as  a  thinking  or  as 
a  loving  being,  save  as  a  Trinity  in  Unity.  There 
is  force  in  these  arguments.  Beyond  question, 
they  are  unanswerable.  As  to  the  former,  a 
thinking  being  becomes  complex  in  his  life  by 
the  very  fact  of  self-consciousness.  That  is,  to 
those  who  say  that  God  is  unitarian,  we  reply 
that  neither  a  divine  personality  nor  any  other 
ever  did  or  can  live  a  unitarian  life.  It  is  an 
impossibility  to  intelligent  existence.  Panthe- 
ism has  some  philosophical  plausibility.  Uni- 
tarianism  has  none  whatever.  As  opposed  to  the 
latter,  it  is  obvious  that  if  God  is  loving  He  must 
have  within  Himself  an  object  of  love,  or  else  He 
was  not  actually  loving  until  creation  came  into 
being ;  unless  the  world  was  eternal,  as  some 
admit  in  order  to  avoid  the  dilemma. 

Again,  look  at  it  in  this  way.  God  is  love. 
This  will  be  disputed  by  no  one  with  whom  we 
are  now  concerned.  If,  then,  He  is  loving,  He 
must  act  accordingly  and  do  deeds  of  love.  But 
how  can  this  be,  unless  He  is  in  some  way  so 
constituted  that  it  is  possible  for  Him  to  come, 


114  WH0  WAS  JESUS   CHRIST? 

or  speak,  or  act  towards  us  ?  A  God  so  consti- 
tuted that  it  is  impossible  that  there  be  in  Him 
that  which  we  call  the  Son  or  the  Holy  Spirit, 
is  reduced  to  a  God  who  has  in  Him  nothing  by 
virtue  of  which  He  can  do  more  than,  at  the 
most,  feel  love  without  any  practical  display  of 
it.  That  is,  the  denial  of  the  Trinity  means  to 
the  Church  a  denial  of  that  conception  of  God 
which  makes  goodness  and  mercy  possible,  and 
renders  Him  a  self-contained  being,  with  no 
characteristics  by  which  He  can  enter  into  rela- 
tions outside  of  Himself. 

Or,  look  at  it  in  another  light.  Is  your  salva- 
tion, is  your  sanctification,  as  well  your  creation, 
the  work  of  God  or  of  a  creature  ?  The  reli- 
gious heart  cannot  admit  the  latter  ;  it  is  revolt- 
ing. But,  if  revelation  through  the  Son,  and 
sanctification  through  the  Holy  Ghost,  are  divine 
works,  then  they  must  be  effected  by  divine 
agents,  that  is,  God  must  be  such  that  He  can 
be  to  us  Creator,  Redeemer,  Sanctifier.  If  He 
can  be  to  us  these  three,  He  must  be  threefold. 
Call  it  three  persons,  or  what  you  will,  threefold 
operation  means  a  threefold  line  of  self-determi- 
nation in  God. 

Do  we  understand  this  doctrine  ?  No  one 
claims  to  do  so  who  is  to  be  respected  for  his 
judgment.  We  do  not,  and  never  can,  know  the 
inner  life  of  God.  But  this  we  do  know,  that 
He  has  manifested  Himself  as  a  Trinity,  and 
that  we  must  cling  thereto,  or  else  ascribe  our 


WHO  WAS  JESUS  CHRIST?  1 1  5 

redemption  and  spiritual  life  to  creatures.  And 
all  we  mean  is,  that  God  is  so  constituted  that, 
while  One,  He  can  yet  be  and  is  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost,  in  fact  as  well  as  in  semblance. 

Do  not  some  hold  this  who  say  they  are  not 
in  accord  with  the  Church,  and  will  not  use  the 
word  "  Trinity  "  ?  Probably,  yes.  And,  if  any  one 
does  hold  it,  he  holds  what  the  Church  means 
and  is  aiming  at,  the  divine  character  of  redemp- 
tion and  regeneration.  That  he  shrinks  from 
using  the  Church's  words  and  creeds  is  usually 
due  to  imagining  that  they  imply  what  extrava- 
gances have  made  of  them.  He  may  not,  be- 
cause of  misapprehension,  see,  with  the  Church, 
that  these  show  really  the  nature  of  God ;  but 
he  grants  the  Church's  essential  demands  who 
ascribes  to  God  alone  the  glory  of  the  rescue  and 
sanctifi  cation  of  this  world,  and  we  can  only  re- 
gret his  not  using  the  Church's  language. 

So  much  for  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  We 
had  to  deal  with  it  in  asking  who  is  Jesus  Christ, 
for,  if  He  is  "  God  manifest  in  the  flesh,"  it  can 
only  be  because,  as  the  Gospel  indicates,  the  na- 
ture of  God  renders  this  a  possibility.  And  we 
see  how  it  is  not  the  weakness  of  Christianity, 
as  some  say,  but  its  strength,  and  is  that  idea 
of  God  which  makes  the  Gospel  good  news  and  a 
treasure  to  mankind,  the  idea  which  alone  gives 
us  a  God  who  can  love  and  can  be  loved. 

But  now  let  us  revert  to  the  main  issue  acrain. 
Some  may  ask  whether,  if  the    deity  of  Christ 


Il6  WHO   WAS  JESUS   CHRIST? 

necessitates  the  Trinity  in  God,  the  former  is 
sufficiently  assured  to  base  upon  it  such  a  fact  ? 
The  Church  reached  this  belief,  as  we  have  seen, 
from  the  premiss  that  its  Lord  and  Founder  was 
divine.  Can  that  be  satisfactorily  shown  to  us, 
critical  and  candid  men  ?  This  is  a  fair  question, 
and  is  entitled  to  an  answer. 

We  may  answer  that  He  claimed  to  be  divine. 
Of  this  it  is  difficult  to  see  any  reasonable  denial, 
when  it  is  understood.  We  will  not  now  con- 
sider texts,  but  consider  the  attitude  which  He 
takes  before  men,  and  that  which  He  expects  men 
to  take  before  Him.  He  asks  allegiance,  love, 
trust,  homage.  He  presents  Himself  always  as 
expecting  us  so  to  bear  ourselves  towards  Him. 
That  is  claiming  divinity  ;  for  no  one  has  a  right 
to  ask  this,  nor  any  reason  to  expect  it  to  be 
granted,  upon  any  other  basis.  He  thus  assumes 
the  relation  that  only  God  should,  or  ever  will, 
receive  from  unsuperstitious  men.  But,  some 
will  say,  He  calls  us  to  Himself,  as  other  teach- 
ers do,  that  He  may  lead  us  to  God.  But  other 
teachers  have  never  done  this  as  He  did,  claim- 
ing adoration  and  the  heart's  surrender.  No  one, 
no  false  prophet  or  true  friend  of  man,  has  ever 
said,  "  Come  unto  me  and  I  will  give  you  rest." 
It  would  mean  attracting  humanity  away  from 
its  only  rest,  enslaving  it  in  a  dangerous  and 
wicked  dependence  upon  another  than  its  Lord. 
That  is,  if  Christ  is  not  God,  He  has  not  only 
demanded  what  no  other  has  dared  to  demand, 


WHO  WAS  JESUS  CHRIST?  WJ 

but  He  has  been  the  great  power  in  history  to 
draw  the  world  away  from  its  God,  to  lean  upon 
another  stay  and  another  trust. 

But  it  nicy  still  be  said  that  more  is  needed  to 
satisfy  us  that  Christ  is  God.  Not  only  must  it 
be  proven  to  us,  we  must  ourselves  see  it,  be- 
fore we  can  be  expected  to  believe  it.  True,  we 
should  not,  and  cannot,  feel  sure  of  anything 
until  we  see  it  for  ourselves.  That  is  the  prin- 
ciple of  these  lectures. 

The  question  comes  down,  then,  to  this,  Do 
we  see  that  Jesus  Christ  is  God  ?  If  He  is,  He 
must  plainly  appear  to  be  such.  Perhaps  we 
must  first,  before  settling  this  question,  settle 
what  God  is,  so  as  to  ascertain  what  He  would 
look  like,  did  we  see  Him  on  earth,  under  the 
form  of  humanity. 

What  is  God  essentially  ?  What  makes  Him 
God  ?  What  is  that  which  constitutes  His  glory, 
His  supremacy,  His  splendor,  and  secures  the 
adoration  of  His  creatures?  Of  course  this, 
whatever  it  is,  must  be  seen  in  any  alleged  in- 
carnation, for  His  creatures  could  not  recognize 
Him  unless  this  divine  glory,  this  which  marks 
off  the  difference  between  Him  and  them,  were 
perceptible.     What  is  this  ? 

Is  it  omnipotent  power,  superiority  to  limita- 
tions and  incapacities,  all-conquering  and  resist- 
less might  ?  If  this  is  what  makes  Him  God, 
then  surely  we  do  not  see  it  in  Jesus,  the  often 
weary,  thwarted,  tortured,  crucified  One ;  and 
then  He  is  not  God. 


Il8  WHO  WAS  JESUS   CHRIST? 

Is  the  glory  of  God  His  wisdom  ?  Is  He  es- 
sentially omniscience  ?  Does  that  constitute  His 
divine  isolation  ?  If  so,  then,  as  we  certainly  do 
not  see  this  in  Jesus,  who  not  only  shows  but 
affirms  His  limitations,  saying  there  are  things 
that  He  knows  not,  He  may  be  denied  to  be  the 
divine  Incarnation. 

Is  that  glory,  again,  His  state  of  majesty  and 
splendor?  Is  He  who  is  enthroned,  known  and 
regarded  as  God  by  the  creatures  who  surround 
Him,  because  of  the  ineffable  light  that  dazzles, 
or  the  accessories  of  dominion  that  awe  ?  If  so, 
then,  surely  we  do  not  see  this  in  the  humble 
Jesus,  who  was  so  approachable,  so  lowly,  so  un- 
feared ;  and  where  the  glory  of  God  is  lacking, 
there  cannot  be  the  vision  of  God. 

That  is,  if,  proceeding  from  these  assumptions, 
one  tell  us  that  the  appearance  of  God  would 
mean  such  a  vision  as  they  would  lead  to  ;  that, 
to  see  God  incarnate,  he  must  see  a  resplendent, 
stately,  all-wise,  invincible  person,  one  who  would 
cast  into  the  shade,  by  these  features,  all  the 
heroes  and  sages  and  monarchs  of  history,  —  we 
can  only  admit  that,  by  this  test,  Jesus  Christ  can- 
not be  proven  to  be  divine.  But  we  can  fancy 
another  replying  —  yes,  there  are  many  who  do 
reply  to  the  question,  What  would  you  expect  to 
see  if  you  saw  God  among  men  ?  —  in  this  way  :  I 
should  not  expect  to  see  that  splendor  and  might, 
for  I  could  not  be  sure  that  the  possessor  of  it 
was    my  God.      Some  angel,   or   some    Lucifer, 


WHO  WAS  JESUS  CHRIST?  1 1 9 

might  assume  a  majesty  that  would  dazzle  me, 
and  display  a  power  that  would  awe  me,  and  so 
such  things  would  not  prove  the  presence  of 
my  God.  But,  to  be  sure  of  seeing  Him,  to  have 
a  disclosure  of  His  presence  that  would  leave 
no  room  for  doubt  that  it  is  He,  I  should  expect 
His  Incarnation  to  be  the  manifestation  of  a 
heart,  a  character,  that  would  be  unmistakably 
divine.  So  I  should  expect  to  see  a  goodness 
such  as  earth  had  never  known,  a  holiness  such 
as  had  been  found  in  no  creature.  I  should  ex- 
pect to  see  a  love  that  is  all-embracing,  and 
never  discouraged  ;  a  patience  that  never  falters 
even  under  ingratitude,  cruelty,  and  death.  That 
is  what  I  should  expect  to  behold,  for  what 
makes  Him  God  to  me  is  the  infinite  love  that 
isolates  Him.  That  is  the  basis  of  His  domin- 
ion. On  that  His  throne  reposes.  Because  of 
that  the  worlds  adore  Him.  That  is  God's  glory. 
Power  and  wisdom  and  state  are  but  the  trap- 
pings of  His  majesty,  the  garments  that  kingli- 
ness  puts  on.  And  just  as  a  king  may  lay  aside 
the  robes  and  state  of  royalty  to  go  on  some 
errand  of  mercy,  and  be  no  less  a  king  because 
retaining  his  kingly  heart  and  kingly  rank,  so 
could  the  Eternal  Son  discard  the  paraphernalia 
of  His  splendor,  and  be  no  less  divine,  when  He 
would  come  in  lowlier  guise  to  rescue  and  recall 
a  world. 

Would  not  this  reply  be  true  ?     As  you  bow 
before  God,  and  serve  Him  with  humble  heart 


120  WHO   WAS  JESUS   CHRIST? 

and  bated  breath,  then  you  think  of  Him  as  the 
One  before  whom  angels  veil  their  faces  and  the 
very  heavens  are  not  clean,  as  the  One  entitled 
to  the  lordship  of  all  that  lives,  do  you  not  know 
and  feel  that  you  do  so  because  of  what  He  is  ; 
not  because  of  His  power  or  greatness,  but  be- 
cause of  His  fathomless  love,  His  infinite,  per- 
fect goodness  ?  You  must  do  so,  if  you  know 
true  godliness  among  men. 

If  this  be  so,  it  is  that  which  we  are  to  look  for 
when  we  look  for  God.  This  is  what  we  should 
expect  in  an  incarnation,  the  display  in  human 
conditions  of  the  divine  character  Is  not  this 
seen  in  Jesus  Christ  ?  Surely  it  is  visible  to  all, 
that  in  Him  are  a  character,  and  a  personality, 
that  are  not  creaturely,  but  divine.  If  perfect 
loveliness  is  the  glory  of  God,  we  see  "  the  glory 
of  God  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ." 

And  we  see  it  nowhere  else.  There  have 
been  good  men,  but  no  infinite  goodness.  There 
have  been  lives  that  showed  kind  hearts,  but 
none  that  showed  such  a  kindness  as  can  sit  upon 
the  throne  of  the  universe.  There  have  been 
godlike  men,  but  none  among  them  was  a  God- 
Man.  We  see  the  glory  of  God  in  no  Socrates, 
nor  John,  nor  Caesar,  nor  Buddha.  In  all  history 
we  see  the  divine  in  the  human,  only  and  solely 
in  the  person  and  career  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

And  so  we  come  back  to  the  question  that  we 
set  out  to  answer  :  How  is  Jesus  Christ  visibly 
and  perceptibly  God  ?      And  we  reply  that  we 


WHO    WAS  JESUS   CHRIST?  121 

know  Him  to  be  such  because  He  looks  like  God, 
is  what  God  is.  The  assertion  of  His  deity  is 
strange  to  some  only  because  they  start  with  a 
wrong  conception  of  deity,  and  then  tell  us  He 
does  not  meet  it.  But  it  does  not  at  all  appear 
strange  to  those  who  start  from  the  true  and 
high  idea  of  God.  To  them,  who  have  grown  out 
of  low  conceptions  of  greatness  and  gained  more 
elevated  apprehensions  of  majesty,  of  moral,  per- 
sonal splendor,  it  needs  no  proof  of  texts,  nor 
Church  authority,  to  make  us  believe  that  God 
was  in  Christ,  for  it  is  plain  and  manifest.  It 
may  be,  it  is,  true  that  what  some  people  may 
mean  by  God  is  not  incarnate  in  Him  ;  but  what 
the  Christian  means  is  there.  The  God  we  wor- 
ship, the  God  whom  we  have  in  mind  in  the  utter- 
ance of  that  name,  that  is  what  we  see  in  Jesus. 
To  us,  through  those  eyes  looks  out  the  divine 
mind,  through  those  lips  speaks  the  divine  heart, 
that  life  in  all  its  parts,  its  lowliest  as  its  most 
glorious  moments,  shows  to  us  God  as  we  believe 
in  Him.  Yes,  in  its  greatest  apparent  antithe- 
sis to  divinity,  the  divinity  of  that  life  is  most  ap- 
parent. If  the  heart  is  what  is  most  divine  in 
God,  and  if  the  character  of  Jesus  is  what  shows 
the  unapproachable  and  uncreated  majesty  that 
marks  Him,  then  never  was  Jesus  so  divine, 
never  does  His  deity  so  shine  out,  as  when  that 
goodness  went  farthest,  and  was  most  tried  in 
suffering;  when  that  love  was  most  displayed  in 
sacrifice  for  the  sins  of  the  world.     That  tender- 


122  WHO    WAS   JESUS   CHRIST? 

ness  was  most  superhuman  when  He  died  for 
those  who  scorned  Him  ;  when  those  cheeks 
were  wet  with  tears,  and  that  brow  was  stained 
with  blood ;  when  those  eyes  looked  out  from 
beneath  the  crown  of  thorns,  when  that  face  was 
wan  and  worn  with  the  night  of  agony,  then  do 
we  see  supremely  "  the  glory  of  God  in  the  face 
of  Jesus  Christ." 

But  some  may  still  say,  How  can  God  become 
man  ?  We  do  not  nakedly  affirm  this  ;  we  say 
that  God  showed  Himself  through  humanity, 
that,  in  our  Lord,  God  the  Son  lived  humanly. 
Well,  how  can  this  be  ? 

This  objection  is  only  another  form  of  the  one 
just  referred  to,  based  upon  a  mistaken  concep- 
tion of  God,  and  adds  thereto  an  equally  erro- 
neous conception  of  humanity. 

Some  evidently  imagine  that  the  Incarnation 
means  the  compression  of  an  infinitely  big  or 
great  being  into  the  narrow  compass  of  human- 
ity. But  God  is  not  to  be  thought  of  as  having 
any  extensiveness  or  bigness  :  He  is  a  Spirit,  and 
spirits  have  no  more  size  than  color.  If  this  is 
not  in  the  mind,  of  course,  incarnation  seems 
impossible  and  absurd,  for  no  sensible  man  can 
admit  or  imagine  that  one  whose  infinitude  is 
that  of  extensiveness  was  made  known  in  Jesus, 
or  can  be  made  known,  in  any  way,  to  men  or 
angels. 

But  realize  that  God's  infinitude  is  intensive, 
not  extensive  ;  is  that   of  quality,  not  quantity  ; 


WHO  WAS  JESUS   CHRIST?  1 23 

realize  that  it  is  perfectness,  not  measureless- 
ness  ;  that  a  limitless  personality  does  not  mean 
one  that  is  of  endless  extent,  but  of  infinite  good- 
ness, —  and  then  the  question  is,  not  whether 
the  infinitely  great  can  contract  itself  into  the 
compass  of  a  human  soul  and  its  life,  but  whether 
the  unlimitedly  perfect  One  can  show  Himself 
through  the  instrumentality  of  a  human  life.  Is 
human  nature,  or  is  it  not,  capable  of  being  the 
channel  of  God's  displaying  Himself  to  His 
creatures  in  His  true  glory  ?  That  it  is  so,  is 
evident,  if  you  conceive  aright  what  that  nature 
was  made  for.  It  was  made  to  show  forth  char- 
acter. Now,  why  cannot  a  humanity,  a  soul, 
properly  prepared,  as  was  that  of  Jesus,  be  capa- 
ble of  showing  forth  a  perfect,  that  is,  a  divine, 
character  ?  A  musician  can  express  his  thought, 
his  life,  in  no  ordinary  piece  of  wood  or  metal, 
but,  if  he  finds  one  prepared,  an  instrument  that 
is  fit,  he  can  through  it  show  forth  the  harmonies 
of  his  mental  creation.  So,  while  other  natures, 
or  created  things,  may  not  be  such,  human  na- 
ture is,  by  its  very  constitution,  adapted  to  show 
forth  the  life,  the  thought,  of  our  Maker.  Or 
look  at  it  in  this  way.  Every  soul  is  like  a  lens 
through  which  we  can  see  some  rays  of  the  light 
of  goodness.  It  was  intended  to  be  such.  Why 
may  there  not  be  one,  suitably  originated  and 
shaped,  which  could  focus  and  show  all  the  glory 
of  the  sunshine,  transmit  all  the  rays  of  full- 
orbed,  holy  love  ?     It   is  difficult  to  see  why,  if 


124        lvno   WAS  JESUS   CHRIST? 

human  life  is  meant  to  express  indwelling  char- 
acter or  personality,  there  may  not  be  a  life,  prop- 
erly begotten,  in  which  should  be  expressed  the 
indwelling  character  or  personality  of  God. 

Now,  it  only  remains  to  ask,  Was  the  life  of 
Jesus  such  ?  We  have  answered  this  by  say- 
ing, Yes,  the  life  of  Jesus  was  the  life  of  God 
under  human  conditions,  as  manifestly  as  can  be 
conceived.  He  said  He  was  God.  He  acted 
as  God.  He  put  Himself  into  relations  that 
God  can  alone  bear  to  the  world.  He  looks  like 
God. 

Suppose  a  creature,  however  highly  exalted, 
were  to  be  incarnate,  do  you  think  he  would  act 
as  Jesus  did,  or  speak  as  He  did,  or  make  the 
impression  He  made  ?  We  should  find  a  con- 
scious inferiority  to  the  Highest.  But  here  we 
find  none.  We  should  find  humility  before  God. 
But  here  is  one  who  says  :  "  I  and  my  Father 
are  one."  We  should  find  dependence  upon  the 
Creator  ;  but  here  we  hear  One  saying  :  "  I  am 
the  Life."  No,  he  knows  not  how  creatures  must 
act,  knows  not  how  holy  creatures  do  act,  in  the 
presence  of  the  Creator,  who  says  that  the  bear- 
ing of  Christ  was  that  of  one  of  them. 

Thus,  strange  as  it  may  seem  to  some,  and 
difficult  to  believe  to  the  mere  philosopher  or  to 
the  heathen,  it  is  not  strange  to  the  Christian, 
has  not  seemed  strange  to  the  Church,  to  believe 
in  the  Incarnation.  It  is  a  necessity  to  those 
who  know  what  God  is  like,  it  is  the  irresistible 


WHO   WAS  JESUS   CHRIST?  1 25 

testimony  to  the  very  senses,  and  the  only  ver- 
dict of  common  sense.  Not  because  others  tell 
us  so,  but  because  it  is  a  patent  fact  to  us,  with 
our  educated  conceptions  of  Deity,  we  live,  and 
expect  to  die,  by  the  belief  that  those  hands  that 
touched  the  suffering  of  old,  and  that  lifted  up 
the  fallen,  were  the  ministers  of  a  divine  pity  ; 
that  the  words  that  brought  that  illumination 
to  the  world,  which  has  lighted  it  up  ever  since, 
were  from  a  divine  mind  ;  that  the  promises  which 
have  been  the  stay  and  peace  of  generations  were 
the  promises  of  a  divine  power  ;  that  the  holiness 
of  the  life  that  met  the  demands  of  justice  in  the 
place  of  imperfect  lives  was  the  holiness  of  the 
Son  of  God  ;  that  the  sacrifice  which  made  atone- 
ment for  the  race's  guilt  was  the  sacrifice  of  the 
Lord  Himself  for  those  who  had  ruined  them- 
selves by  sin  ;  that  the  resurrection  which  opened 
the  gates  of  immortality  was  the  triumph  of  one 
who  had  in  Him  the  power  of  an  endless  life  ; 
and  that  the  ascension  from  Olivet  was  the  In- 
carnate Word  assuming  forevermore  His  throne. 
The  Christian  Church,  the  body  of  believers,  have 
decided  that  this  is  Christianity,  its  power,  its 
value,  its  essence,  that  without  which  any  system 
is  not  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ. 

Does  not  this  Catholic  faith  land  us  in  seem- 
ing contradictions  and  insoluble  difficulties  ?  Cer- 
tainly it  does.  We  cannot  explain  the  relation- 
ship of  the  Persons  in  the  Trinity  to  the  Unity, 
nor  that  of  the  Incarnate  Son  to  the  divine  es- 


1 26  WHO  WAS  JESUS   CHRIST? 

sence.  But  what  of  it  ?  We  are  everywhere 
surrounded  by  the  inexplicable,  and  every  man 
who  thinks  has  to  hold  what  the  great  thinker 
taught  us  to  call  the  antinomies.  Belief  in  God 
in  any  form,  in  His  care,  in  His  eternity,  leads 
us  to  contrasts  or  apparent  antagonisms  that 
human  thought  can  never  harmonize ;  includes 
factors  which  cannot  be  reduced  to  any  formula. 
Christianity,  as  Butler  showed,  has  no  difficulty 
of  this  kind  that  does  not  equally  beset  philoso- 
phy. What  are  we  to  do  ?  One  course  is  to  stop 
thinking,  to  ignore  the  whole  matter,  and  accept 
agnostic  confessions  of  mental  impotence  from 
the  very  beginning.  We  cannot,  we  will  not,  do 
this.  It  is  as  wrong  as  it  is  vain  to  expect  that 
an  extinguisher  upon  mental  activity  will  be  sub- 
mitted to.  Another  course  is  to  sacrifice  one 
horn  of  the  dilemma  to  the  other.  So  have  some 
done  with  Christ.  Some  have  denied  His  divin- 
ity, others  His  humanity,  in  order  to  solve  the 
problem  and  gain  simplicity.  Of  course,  any 
problem  can  be  solved  if  one  is  at  liberty. to  sup- 
press troublesome  factors,  but  it  is  hardly  wise, 
or  the  way  to  a  satisfactory  result.  The  third 
course  is  to  act  as  we  do  every  day  in  common 
life,  —  to  recognize  all  the  evident  factors  and  go 
without  a  solution  if  it  cannot  be  reached  with- 
out denying  some  of  them.  This  is  what  Chris- 
tendom has  done.  It  affirms  that  Jesus  is  both 
God  and  man,  because  both  are  equally  manifest, 
but  admits  frankly  that  there  is  no  formula  that 


WHO  WAS  JESUS  CHRIST?  \2J 

will  satisfy  all  the  conditions,  and  repudiates  the 
folly  of  seeking  relief  by  some  statement  that 
might  be  simpler,  but  only  at  the  cost  of  one  or 
more  of  the  truths  that  are  all  of  equal  precious- 
ness  and  importance  to  the  believing  and  the 
needy  soul. 

Shall  we  ever  be  better  off  ?  Perhaps,-  to  some 
degree  hereafter,  but  we  shall  never  understand 
the  inner  life  and  relations  of  the  God-Man.  Only 
God  can  understand  His  relations  to  the  human, 
in  creation  and  providence ;  and  more  obviously 
true  is  it  that  only  He  can  comprehend  His  re- 
lations in  a  life  lived  under  human  conditions. 
And  so  to  all  eternity  it  will  be  true,  as  Jesus 
said  :  "  No  man  knoweth  the  Son  but  the  Father, 
and  no  man  knoweth  who  the  Father  is  but  the 
Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  shall  reveal 
Him." 

In  the  roof  of  the  apse  of  the  Church  of  Santa 
Sophia,  in  Constantinople,  the  emperor  who  built 
it  placed,  on  the  gilt  background  of  mosaic,  a  co- 
lossal figure  of  Christ  in  colored  stones,  which, 
with  outspread  hands,  looked  down  upon  the 
worshipers.  When  the  Moslems  captured  New* 
Rome,  they  changed  this  church  into  a  mosque, 
and  replaced  this  brilliant  picture  by  new  blocks 
of  golden  stone  or  glass.  But  the  contrast  be- 
tween the  new  and  the  older  gilding  was  so 
marked  that  it  made  no  less  distinct,  though 
colorless  and  dim,  the  outlines  of  the  figure  of 
the  Saviour.     And  so  for  centuries  since  the  Mo- 


128  WHO  WAS  JESUS   CHRIST? 

hammedans,  with  such  imperfect  views  of  Jesus 
and  His  revelation,  have  been  worshiping  there, 
in  the  presence  of  a  shadow  of  Christ,  and  bowed 
beneath  the  benediction  of  His  outstretched  arms. 
Thus  it  is  that,  to  many  minds  about  us,  there 
has  faded  from  the  heavens  over  them  the  love- 
liness and  beauty  of  the  Son  of  God.  They  see 
but  a  Jesus  who  is  like  the  world  of  men  about 
them,  though  perhaps  more  golden.  They  only 
find  in  Him  a  shadow  of  what  He  once  had  been 
to  them  in  earlier  days  ;  and  though  they  may 
not  see  Him  in  all  His  splendor,  though  they  may 
not  even  realize  His  presence,  yet  He  bends  over 
them  in  blessing.  But  when  faith  comes  back 
to  them,  when  again  they  rear  the  shrine  that 
their  hearts  call  for,  and  restore  the  love  and  trust 
that  made  their  fathers  what  they  were,  they  will 
see  Him  again  in  all  His  glory,  they  will  rein- 
vest Him  with  His  divine  character,  and  over 
them  once  more  will  they  see,  to  their  joy  and 
to  their  comfort,  the  more  than  rainbow-hued 
beauty  of  "  the  image  of  the  Invisible  God." 


LECTURE  V. 

WHAT    DID    CHRIST    FOUND  ? 

"  The  Church  of  the  living  God,  the  pillar  and  ground  of  the 
truth."  —  i  Tim.  iii.  15. 

Having  seen  who  Jesus  Christ  is,  we  now 
come  to  the  question,  What  did  He  found  ?  What 
did  He  leave  behind  Him  ?  or,  what  is  the  idea 
of  the  Church  ? 

Here  we  open  up  a  subject  that  has  long  been 
the  theme  of  acute  and  brilliant  controversy  upon 
more  than  one  issue  that  is  involved.  Let  us  en- 
deavor to  discuss  it  as  simply  as  possible,  and 
with  reference  to  the  principal  differences  of 
opinion  on  the  subject. 

And  first  we  notice  that,  immediately  and 
strictly,  Christ  founded  nothing.  Some  seem  to 
think  differently,  however,  and  speak  of  "  the 
Society  that  Jesus  formed,"  as  if  there  was  such 
a  thing,  which  of  course  would  then  be  the  norm 
for  us  forever.  But  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  in 
any  sense  He  can  be  said  to  have  formed  a  So- 
ciety. During  His  lifetime,  His  followers  came 
and  went,  walked  with  Him  and  fell  away,  with 
notable  fickleness  ;  and  as  to  those  who  were 
more  intimately  associated  with  Him,  even  they 


130  WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND? 

forsook  Him  in  His  peril.  One  betrayed  Him, 
their  leader  denied  Him,  and  all  returned  after 
His  crucifixion  to  their  homes  and  their  pursuits. 
Surely  we  cannot  look  at  such  a  state  of  affairs 
for  the  beginning  of  that  brotherhood  which  has 
done  His  work  in  the  world.  Such  a  Society,  if 
it  is  entitled  to  that  name,  with  no  organization, 
no  agreed  belief,  no  capacity  for  endurance, 
would  never  have  been  heard  of  again,  had  it 
been  the  whole  of  the  movement  that  Jesus  ini- 
tiated. It  may  have  a  certain  attractiveness,  as 
a  collection  of  men  united  by  common  regard  for 
Him,  but  it  had  not  one  of  the  features  which 
have  marked  that  Church  which  has  been  a  bless- 
ing to  mankind. 

But,  again,  the  Church  could  not  be  founded 
until  after  He  had  risen  from  the  grave,  ascended, 
and  sent  the  Holy  Spirit.  They  who  hold  the 
view  just  referred  to  limit  their  idea  of  the 
Church  to  what  he  initiated  in  His  life,  because 
usually  they  do  not  believe  that  He  did  these 
things.  But,  to  those  who  do  believe  that  the 
grave  was  not  the  end  of  His  career,  the  matter 
presents  a  different  aspect.  To  such,  these  sub- 
sequent events  are  essential  to  Christianity.  The 
resurrection  was  of  the  very  essence  of  Christ's 
redeeming  work,  being  the  evidence  of  His  ac- 
cepted mediation,  and  the  opening  of  that  im- 
mortal life  which  He  came  to  restore  to  the  race 
for  which  He  had  made  atonement.  It  makes 
His  work  a  gospel,  since  without  it  there  would 


WHAT  DID  CHRIST  FOUND?  131 

be  no  reason  to  believe  that  He  had  not  lived  and 
died  in  vain,  nor  any  reversal  of  the  all-conquer- 
ing law  of  death.  The  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost 
was  also  needed  to  give  that  spiritual  illumination 
which  was  as  necessary  to  the  beginning  of  the 
Gospel's  spread  as  to  its  continuance.  So  the 
Church  could  not  be  founded  until  these  events 
had  taken  place,  of  which  it  was  to  preach  the 
one  in  the  power  given  by  the  other. 

It  is,  then,  a  superficial  error  to  speak  of 
Christ's  founding  the  Church,  as  His  immediate 
act,  and  violates  the  facts  in  the  case.  We  can 
only  speak  of  it  during  His  life  as  a  still  future 
thing  which  He  expressed  when  He  said,  "I 
will  build  my  Church."  For  He  did  it  mediately ; 
that  is,  others  did  it  at  His  command  and  in  this 
way  :  during  His  ministry,  He  was  training  se- 
lected men,  by  peculiar  intimacy  and  constant 
instruction,  for  such  a  future  task  ;  but  chiefly 
did  this  training  take  place  in  the  interviews 
after  His  resurrection,  when,  as  we  are  told,  He 
taught  them  regarding  the  Kingdom  of  God,  for 
even  the  preceding  years  of  intercourse  could 
not  have  prepared  them  adequately  for  such  a 
work.  But  when  the  series  of  events  was  fin- 
ished for  the  perpetuation  of  which  they  were 
to  provide,  when  their  training  was  at  last  com- 
pleted, when  Christ  had  finally  withdrawn  from 
earth  and  the  Holy  Ghost  came  upon  them,  then 
these  men,  called  the  Apostles,  founded  the 
Church  in  accordance  with  the  instructions  re- 
ceived. 


132  WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND? 

This  is  what  we  mean  by  saying  that  we  be- 
lieve in  the  Apostolic  Church.  We  mean  that 
the  true  and  real  Church  is  that  planted  and 
shaped  by  these  men  appointed  thereto ;  that, 
on  the  one  hand,  we  recognize  as  normal  no 
Christianity  modeled  upon  any  antecedent  state 
of  affairs,  nor,  on  the  other,  can  we  recognize  as 
lawful  any  Christianity  that  has  arisen  since. 
To  us,  that  is  the  Church  which  derives  its  ori- 
gin from  the  apostolic  action,  and  is  in  continu- 
ous organic  succession  from  it.  It  follows,  of 
course,  that  the  Church  must  retain  the  charac- 
ter and  form  given  it  by  these  commissioned 
men  ;  that,  just  as  that  stream  of  Church  life 
which  is  legitimate  must  come  from  the  apostolic 
source,  so  any  departure  thence  is  a  departure 
from  the  foundation  laid  by  the  only  men  ever 
authorized  to  formulate  the  belief  or  the  institu- 
tions of  Christianity.  No  one  since  has  ever 
had  the  authority  or  the  capacity  to  do  this. 

Now,  what  is  this  apostolic  Christianity,  to 
which  we  are  to  conform,  and  whence  alone  we 
can  trace  any  valid  ecclesiastical  pedigree  ? 

We  have  not  time,  nor  is  it  necessary  to  the 
scope  to  which  we  limit  ourselves,  to  define  this 
in  detail.  All  that  is  proposed  is,  to  seek  its 
polity  and  its  creed  ;  about  which  are  the  princi- 
pal divergencies  between  Christians  at  present, 
and  which  also  really  cover  other  points  that  may 
not  at  first  seem  to  be  involved. 

But,  before  proceeding,  one  broad  issue  must 


WHAT  DID    CHRIST  FOUND?  1 33 

be  met.  It  will  be  affirmed  by  many  that  apos- 
tolic Christianity  is  that  which  is  laid  down  in 
apostolic  writings,  or  that  the  New  Testament  is 
the  only  source  of  learning  about  it,  so  that  we 
are  shut  up  to  its  pages  for  the  features  that  are 
to  mark  the  Church.  We  have  already  referred 
to  this  principle,  which  is  the  Puritan  position, 
though  it  is  rarely  applied  with  consistency  ;  for 
not  only  do  they  who  claim  it  adhere  to  impor- 
tant features  which  cannot  be  found  explicitly  in 
the  New  Testament,  but  furthermore  it  is  impos- 
sible to  adhere  to  it  under  the  changing  condi- 
tions of  succeeding  ages. 

For  instance,  to  apply  it  rigidly  would,  on  the 
one  hand,  condemn  those  who  fail  to  observe 
such  practices  as  the  kiss  of  peace,  the  agape,  or 
love  -  feast  before  the  Holy  Communion,  the 
anointing  of  the  sick,  and  other  customs  still. 
These  were  clearly  practiced  in  apostolic  times, 
according  to  the  New  Testament,  and,  if  com- 
plete conformity  to  its  statements  is  essential, 
consistency  would  require  that  all  who  advocate 
this  principle  should  resume  them.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  rigid  application  of  this  rule  would  ex- 
clude customs  adhered  to  by  those  who  claim  to 
follow  it.  Take,  for  instance,  the  practices  of 
observing  Sunday  instead  of  Saturday;  of  bap- 
tizing infants  ;  of  having  services  that  are  con- 
ducted with  sermon,  prayers,  and  hymns,  without 
the  Lord's  Supper ;  and  the  admission  of  women 
to   the  Communion.      These  are   by  no  means 


134  WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND? 

plainly  inculcated  in  the  New  Testament.  Large 
bodies  of  Christians,  who  claim  to  be  Bible  Chris- 
tians, reject  one  or  more  of  them,  which  shows 
that  the  matter  cannot  be  settled  on  such  au- 
thority alone,  and  that  any  warrant  for  these 
customs  must  rest  upon  some  other  argument 
than  Biblical  precept.  On  the  other  hand,  no 
body  of  Christians  either  accepts  or  rejects  them 
all.  Each  body  makes  a  selection  such  as  suits 
it,  thereby  resorting  to  some  other  criterion  than 
that  of  the  letter  of  the  Bible.  The  only  sect 
that  approaches  consistency  is  that  of  the  Sev- 
enth Day  Baptists,  which  gives  up  infant  bap- 
tism and  also  Sunday  observance.  Others  not 
only  cling  to  these,  but  also  to  other  practices 
that  have  no  stronger  warrant  in  the  Scripture 
pages. 

The  relation  of  the  New  Testament  to  these 
practices  will  be  seen  when  we  come  to  speak  of 
the  place  of  the  Bible,  but  now  we  see  that  it  is 
not  such  as  some  maintain,  —  the  only  source  of 
deciding  what  is  the  fullness  of  apostolic  Chris- 
tianity. 

Nor  should  we  expect  it  to  be  so.  Consider 
two  facts.  One  is  the  origin  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. It  is  composed  of  letters,  or  books,  writ- 
ten by  Apostles  or  their  pupils  after  the  Church 
had  been  founded  by  oral  teaching.  They  were 
written  during  a  period  extending  from  twenty  to 
seventy  years  subsequent  to  our  Lord's  Ascen- 
sion, for   the  purpose    of    instructing  particular 


WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND?  1 35 

churches  or  persons  regarding  points  that  needed 
special  treatment.  Therefore  it  could  not  be  ex- 
pected that  they  should  explicitly  contain  every- 
thing that  the  Apostles  wished  to  be  remem- 
bered of  all  that  they  had  taught  in  their  preach- 
ing. Correspondence  is  meant  to  treat  particu- 
lar topics,  not  to  include  everything  in  the  mind 
of  the  writer,  however  important. 

Again,  consider  this.  The  whole  Church  was 
in  its  missionary  stage,  but  some  parts  were 
peculiarly  undeveloped,  so  that,  even  so  far  as 
passages  in  the  New  Testament  are  descriptive 
of  the  condition  of  affairs  at  the  time,  they  can- 
not be  shown  to  imply  that  this  condition  is  to 
be  regarded  as  final.  This  would  be  like  affirm- 
ing that,  from  a  letter  of  a  missionary  to  some 
recent  converts  to-day,  we  could  infer  that  the 
condition  it  indicated  is  the  full  realization  of  his 
teaching. 

All  this  shows  that,  in  order  to  get  a  complete 
idea  of  the  principles  and  practices  of  apostolic 
Christianity,  we  must  add  other  data  to  the  ex- 
plicit statements  that  we  find  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment writings.  Such  are  the  hints  or  implica- 
tions which  are  contained  in  them,  and  which 
will  often  lead  to  unexpected  results  as  regards 
some  people  ;  as  for  instance  those  that  relate  to 
principles  of  ritual  and  government.  Again,  we 
must  add  the  evidences  of  apostolic  teachings  af- 
forded by  the  literature  and  institutions  of  the 
early  Church,  which  cannot  be  explained  away  on 


136  WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND? 

the  theory  of  corrupt  or  willful  additions,  since 
we  find  them  in  existence  too  generally  and  too 
soon  for  such  a  supposition  to  be  reasonable. 
The  fruit  of  a  tree  is  involved  in  the  idea  of  the 
tree,  and  so  a  feature  found  in  churches  taught 
by  apostolic  men  as  soon  as  they  take  shape, 
must  in  all  reason  be  regarded  as  having  been  in- 
tended by  these  men  to  be  a  factor  in  the  Church 
as  they  would  have  it  develop. 

This  is  the  position  of  the  Church  of  history, 
the  Church  to  which  we  belong,  and  our  warrant 
for  the  peculiarities  that  mark  us,  over  against 
the  bodies  of  fellow-Christians  that  differ  from 
us.  We  claim,  and,  did  the  limits  of  this  lecture 
permit,  the  claim  would  be  substantiated,  that  our 
ways  and  principles  are  in  conformity  with  that 
picture  of  the  Apostolic  Church  which  is  gained 
from  all  the  data  in  our  possession.  We  do  not 
claim,  that  is,  that  we  know  no  source  for  guid- 
ance here  but  the  written  Scriptures.  We  be- 
lieve we  have  other  sources,  which  do  not  con- 
flict with  Biblical  indications,  but  are  harmonious 
with  them.  As  has  been  said,  our  opponents  all 
act  upon  the  same  principle  in  this  or  that  re- 
spect. We  only  claim  to  be  consistent,  and  to 
extend  the  principle  in  a  reasonable  way,  and  to 
a  proper  degree. 

But  we  may  now  dwell  upon  only  the  more 
fundamental  features  of  that  Apostolic  Chris- 
tianity by  which  the  Gospel  received  from  Christ 
was  to  be  perpetuated  through  the  ages  to  come. 


WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUXD  ?  1 37 

These  are,  the  organization  of  Christians  in  a 
Church  for  the  promotion  of  the  Gospel  and  of 
mutual  edification,  with  the  right  to  legislate  to 
these  ends  as  expediency  should  demand,  united 
by  a  ministry  perpetuated  through  its  highest 
order,  and  on  the  basis  of  a  creed  of  accepted 
gospel  facts.  The  Roman  Catholic  adds  sub- 
mission to  the  Pope  as  an  element  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Church,  the  argument  being  that  such  has 
been  the  growth  of  Christianity.  The  reply  is, 
that  it  has  been  the  growth  in  that  part  of  Chris- 
tendom under  that  particular  see,  and  unknown 
elsewhere ;  therefore  it  is  as  local  and  as  uncath- 
olic  as  the  Congregationalism  of  New  England 
or  the  Presbyterianism  of  Scotland ;  and  those 
now  addressed  are  supposed  to  need  no  refuta- 
tion of  its  claims. 

Until  recently,  it  was  not  disputed  that  the 
Church  is  organized  and  united  through  its  min- 
istry. But,  about  two  hundred  years  ago,  there 
arose  in  England  a  view  which  has  obtained  some 
currency  in  that  country  and  America,  being  the 
theory  of  the  Congregationalists,  Unitarians, 
Universalists,  and  Baptists,  often  modified,  how- 
ever, in  practice.  This  position,  so  new  and  so 
local  in  Christendom,  is  that  in  the  Church  the 
only  general  bond  of  union  is  that  invisible,  and 
undoubtedly  supreme  one,  of  common  relation- 
ship to  Christ ;  that  the  only  organization  is 
that  of  each  several  congregation,  which  has  the 
power  of  appointing  the  ministry,  and  can   be 


I  3  8  WHA  T  DID   CHRIST  FO  UND  ? 

subjected  to  no  other  laws  than  its  own.  This  is 
the  theory  of  Independency,  or  so-called  Congre- 
gationalism, directly  traversing  the  position  held 
by  all  the  rest  of  Christendom  in  all  ages. 

The  arguments  for  it  are  substantially  two  : 
namely,  that  the  nature  of  Christianity  requires 
exemption  from  laws  and  rules,  allows  only  a 
spiritual  brotherhood  ;  and  that  passages  in  the 
New  Testament  show,  as  for  instance  at  Corinth, 
a  state  of  affairs  of  this  sort.  To  these  argu- 
ments we  reply,  in  general,  that  the  former  as- 
sumes an  idea  of  Christianity  which  may  well  be 
scrutinized  ;  and  that  the  latter  assumes  a  cer- 
tain condition  to  be  normal  which  perhaps  was 
not.  But  it  were  best  to  advance  the  positive 
arguments  for  the  organic  view,  which  has  the 
presumption  in  its  favor  as  the  undeviating  prac- 
tice until  this  new  view  arose,  and  is  the  prevail- 
ing one  still. 

In  the  first  place,  whatever  may  be  said  of 
some  cases,  we  find  others  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment where  organic  unity  under  Apostolic  regi- 
men is  clear.  We  find  the  Church  to  be  more 
and  more,  as  the  years  go  on  which  the  New 
Testament  covers,  a  brotherhood  that  is  ruled 
and  ordered,  each  congregation  being  united  with 
the  whole  body,  and  the  ministry  being  qualified 
by  others  than  the  worshipers,  that  is,  by  Apos- 
tles, or  those  whom  they  selected  as  their  agents. 

But  this  is  all  made  the  plainer  by  the  fact  that, 
as  soon  as  we  find  Christendom  in  shape  and  at 


WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND?  1 39 

work,  when  we  have  many  sources  of  informa- 
tion, it  is  found  to  be  organized  in  this  way ;  and 
Independency,  if  it  had  ever  existed  anywhere, 
has  entirely  disappeared.  It  may  be  said  that 
this  was  the  result  of  a  defection  from  original 
simplicity.  But  this  is  too  much  for  us  to  be- 
lieve. We  might  find  such  a  supposition  plausi- 
ble after  the  lapse  of  a  more  protracted  time,  but 
it  is  not  to  be  accepted  as  a  reasonable  explana- 
tion of  a  state  of  affairs  that  is  universal  within 
twenty  or  thirty  years  of  St.  John's  lifetime,  or 
less  than  a  century  after  Pentecost.  It  implies 
a  rapidity  of  corruption  which  there  is  no  reason 
to  believe  in,  which  is  contradicted  by  all  the 
facts  ;  and  a  revolution  so  complete  that  it  could 
not  have  become  supreme,  as  it  did,  without 
awakening  any  protest  in  any  land  or  place. 
That  which  was  an  undisputed  rule  at  this  time 
seems  to  us,  beyond  debate  by  intelligent  men, 
the  indication  of  the  known  wish  and  teaching 
of  Apostolic  men. 

Again,  the  question  is  settled  by  the  object  of 
the  foundation  of  the  Church.  It  was  established 
to  preach  the  Gospel,  as  well  as  to  perpetuate 
the  means  of  edifying  believers,  or  the  means  of 
grace.  But  this  demands  concerted  action,  and 
that  means  organization.  It  is  difficult  to  be- 
lieve that  those  founders  should  have  given  such 
a  commission  to  their  converts,  and  then  left 
them  incohesive,  with  no  capacity  for  united  ac- 
tion, no  order  of  men  to  provide  for  the  founda- 
tion of  new  congregations. 


I4O  WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND? 

The  fact  is,  that  this  theory  only  thinks  of  the 
ministry  as  a  means  of  edifying  a  Christianity 
already  in  existence.  It  was  invented  in  such 
conditions  where  it  was  not  called  upon  to  sub- 
mit to  the  test  of  the  Church's  essential  work. 
It  is  inconceivable  how,  on  such  a  basis,  the 
faith  of  that  England  where  it  arose  could  have 
come  into  being,  or  how  the  Church  would  ever 
have  spread  beyond  the  walls  of  the  cities  that 
Apostles  visited.  A  Christianity  thus  begun 
would  have  had  but  the  temporary  life  of  certain 
local  assemblies,  which  would  soon  have  died  out, 
leaving  the  memory  of  an  abortive  movement 
that  had  no  machinery  for  its  own  perpetuation. 

This  is  confirmed  by  the  practice  of  these  very 
Independents  when  they  would  act  upon  the  un- 
believing world.  In  that  grandly  successful  mis- 
sionary work  that  their  warm  hearts  have  prose- 
cuted, they  have  had  to  abandon  their  own  prin- 
ciple. Apart  from  any  question  of  the  needed 
degree  of  organization  at  home  to  prosecute  the 
work,  as  soon  as  they  found  a  mission,  with  its 
one  or  more  stations,  they  proceed  to  organize 
it,  of  very  necessity,  with  a  ruling  and  self-per- 
petuating ministry.  They  cannot  leave  these 
congregations  to  be  isolated  or  autonomous,  nor 
can  they  leave  to  each  one  the  erection  of  its 
own  ministry.  So  they  unite  them,  have  common 
legislative  bodies,  approve  and  qualify  the  clergy 
by  clergymen,  thus  doing  exactly  what  the  old 
Church   has   done.     This   would    seem  to  show 


WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND?  141 

that  it  is  the  very  law  of  the  life  of  Christianity 
that  for  its  work  there  must  be  organized  union, 
and  a  directing  ministry  that  passes  upon  the 
fitness,  and  confers  the  title,  of  those  who  seek 
to  enter  its  ranks.  Anything  that  is  thus  the 
law  of  the  life  of  Christianity  is  a  part  of  it,  and 
must  have  been  in  intent,  as  ail  our  data  show  it 
was  in  fact,  and  as  the  Church  has  ever  said  it 
was,  the  teaching  of  the  Apostles. 

But  this  is  not  all.  The  Church  is  found,  at  a 
time  when  it  could  only  have  been  due  to  Apos- 
tolic origin,  legislating  in  regard  to  its  ritual  and 
customs  and  ordinances,  and  doing  so  with  the 
expectation  that  such  rules  should  be  obeyed. 
That  is,  the  ideal  Church  has  the  right  to  reg- 
ulate its  life  according  to  indications  of  expedi- 
ency. This  is  denied  by  those  who  say  that 
nothing  is  binding  which  is  not  laid  down  in 
Scripture.  But  that  is  not  only  an  absurdity  for 
a  society  that  was  founded  to  work  in  all  times 
and  all  places  ;  it  is  that  bondage  which  St.  Paul 
had  to  rebuke  as  the  leaven  of  Judaism,  the  re- 
turn from  the  New  Testament  to  the  Old,  im- 
parting into  the  New  what  is  not  there,  but  is 
in  the  Pentateuch  only,  minute  directions  for  all 
things.  It  is  one  of  the  curiosities  of  human  ec- 
centricity that  they  who  say  so  much  about  lib- 
erty in  Christ,  and  assail  us  Churchmen  as  vic- 
tims to  legalism,  base  their  whole  argument  and 
action  upon  that  very  principle,  and  deny  to 
Christendom    the   freedom    to   legislate   for   its 


142  WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND? 

needs.  For  this  is  Christian  liberty,  the  right  to 
adapt  measures  to  emergencies,  under  the  guid- 
ance of  God  ;  and  it  carries  with  it  the  duty  of 
the  individual  to  submit,  unless  he  can  say  that 
any  law  is  against  the  written  word  of  God. 

But  it  may  be  added,  as  regards  this  question 
of  liberty,  that  it  is  as  impossible  under  the  In- 
dependent theory  as  under  that  pure  democracy 
that  it  imitates  in  the  state.  Liberty  means 
protection  of  rights,  safeguards  against  tempo- 
rary or  local  tyrannies,  and  this  can  only  come 
with  constitutional  forms,  which  in  turn  come 
with  concerted  organization  and  established 
order.  An  unorganized  Christianity  might  be 
endurable  if  all  Christians  were  saints.  It  would 
be  intolerable  as  they  are,  intolerable  to  the  laity, 
and  utterly  so  to  the  ministry,  as  so  many  are 
finding  out ;  who  either  modify  this  Indepen- 
dency while  nominally  adhering  to  it,  or  leave 
it  for  the  generous  shelter  of  such  a  condition  as 
the  usual  form  of  Christianity  affords.  "  The 
liberty  wherewith  Christ  has  made  us  free  "  is  not 
found  where  numbers  rule  immediately,  where 
transient  majorities  produce  the  most  galling 
tyrannies  ;  but  it  is  only  found,  if  at  all,  where 
settled  principles,  recognized  rights,  and  organic 
forms  of  law,  in  church  or  state,  can  be  appealed 
to  and  enforced  against  the  local  or  widespread 
despotisms  of  the  hour. 

For  reasons  thus  given,  all  but  a  slight  fraction 
of  Christendom  has  lived  without  the  suggestion 


WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND?  1 43 

of  so  crippling  an  idea  as  the  erratic  and  provin- 
cial principle  of  Independency.  But,  while  all 
the  Church  with  this  exception  holds  to  organi- 
zation perpetuated  through  its  ministry,  there  is 
a  part  of  Protestantism  which  holds  to  a  theory 
that  it  is  perpetuated  through  the  Presbyters, 
than  whom  it  is  claimed  that  no  higher  officer 
is  allowable.  This  is  Presbyterianism,  or  the 
polity  of  the  Protestants  in  some  countries,  — 
France,  Switzerland,  the  Rhinelands,  and  Scot- 
land, as  well  as  those  among  us  who  are  con- 
nected with  them.  To  it,  the  general  usage  of 
Christendom  replies  that  there  was  established  in 
the  Apostolic  Church  a  higher  office,  called  the 
Episcopate,  to  which  alone  is  committed  the 
prerogative  of  ordaining.  Both  sides,  let  it  be 
noted,  hold  to  the  "Apostolic  Succession."  That 
is  a  term  criticised  as  often  ignorantly  as  intelli- 
gently. It  really  means  only  this,  that  the  order 
of  ministers  in  the  Church  does  not  and  cannot 
begin  by  any  one  taking  the  ministry  upon  him- 
self, or  by  any  layman  giving  it  to  him,  as  Inde- 
pendency holds  ;  but  was  begun  by  the  Apostles 
appointing  the  first  ministers,  who  appointed 
their  successors  in  turn.  That  is,  the  ministry, 
rightly  and  truly,  is  a  succession  of  a  corpora- 
tion, or  clerical  body,  in  the  Church,  initiated  by 
the  Apostles.  Now,  the  Presbyterian  theory,  of 
course,  involves  this  when  it  says  that  only  pres- 
byters can  make  presbyters,  and  that  laymen 
cannot.     But  it  differs  from  the  usual  position  of 


144  WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND? 

Christendom  in  denying  that  this  succession  is 
to  be  kept  up  through  ordination  by  bishops. 

Our  reasons  for  holding  to  this  are,  first,  that 
the  principle  is,  we  believe,  found  in  the  Apos- 
tolic writings.  We  find  there,  not  that  any  min- 
isters could  ordain,  but  only  designated  and  qual- 
ified ones.  If  it  is  said  that  this  interpretation 
is  not  clear,  we  then  add  that  it  is  made  so  to  us 
by  what  we  find  to  be  the  rule  of  the  primitive 
Christians.  As  soon  as  we  find  a  local  church 
equipped  in  any  land,  it  has  a  bishop.  As,  one 
by  one,  the  various  parts  of  Christendom  come 
out  of  the  misty  days  of  their  origin,  and  have  a 
literature  and  institutions,  they  are  all  found  with 
this  office,  to  which  ordaining  and  ruling  are  re- 
stricted. It  is  the  only  kind  of  ministry  known 
in  those  days  when  the  voices  of  men  like  John 
and  Paul  and  Peter  were  hardly  still. 

This  is  explained  by  some  as  being  only  a 
growth.  Suppose  it  was  so.  Does  not  the 
growth  of  a  tree  show  the  intention  of  the  tree  ? 
If  it  bear  apples,  then  it  was  planted  to  bear  ap- 
ples ;  and  so,  if  the  Church  developed  into  Episco- 
pacy, it  must  have  been  so  shaped  that  it  would. 
The  only  alternative  is  to  say  that  Episcopacy 
is  a  corrupt  growth,  a  violation  of  the  Apos- 
tolic intention.  This  is  to  us  inadmissible,  for 
two  reasons  :  on  the  one  hand,  we  do  not  see 
any  warrant  for  accusing  those  Christians  of  fall- 
ing into  a  corruption  so  general  and  so  notable 
in    less    than    half   a   century   after    St.    John's 


WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND?  1 45 

death ;  and  on  the  other,  it  would  have  been  not 
only  a  corruption,  but  a  revolution  ;  which,  as 
has  been  said  regarding  organization,  cannot  rea- 
sonably be  believed  to  have  taken  place  with  no 
known  resistance,  no  recorded  appeal  from  it. 
So  devoted  and  so  widely  extended  a  body  of 
men,  as  Christians  were  then,  do  not  become  sub- 
jects of  an  unwarranted  usurpation,  which  Epis- 
copacy was,  if  not  of  original  intention. 

However,  whether  a  growth,  or  wholly  or  in 
part  an  imposition  by  Apostolic  authority,  Epis- 
copacy is  the  law  of  the  Church's  life  as  much 
as  organization  is.  Suppose  any  outsider  were 
asked  this  question,  What  is  the  peculiarity  of 
the  Christian  ministry,  as  distinct  from  that  of 
the  Jews  or  Mohammedans  or  any  other  religious 
system,  when  all  its  extent  is  considered  ?  Would 
he  not  have  to  reply  that  its  peculiarity  is  that  it 
has  bishops  ?  The  exceptions  are  too  local  and 
temporary  to  affect  the  fact  that  such  has  been 
the  historical  characteristic  of  the  Christian  min- 
istry. But  beyond  this,  in  another  sense,  it  is 
the  law  of  the  Church's  life.  It  is  necessary  to 
efficiency.  Just  as  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  Chris- 
tianity could  have  survived  its  foundation  if  not 
organized,  so  is  it  difficult  to  see  how  it  could 
have  been  spread  without  any  appointing  and 
directing  office.  "  What  is  everybody's  business 
is  nobody's  business  "  is  as  true  in  religious  as 
in  other  matters.  And  it  has  never  been  spread 
save  on  this  principle.     Even  they  who  deny  it, 


I46  WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND? 

or  its  extreme  application,  come  back  to  it  when 
they  appoint  superintendents  of  districts,  or  di- 
rectors of  missionary  work,  —  that  is,  set  clergy- 
men over  clergymen.  The  most  signal  instance 
is  that  of  the  great  Methodist  body,  whose  noble 
work  for  Christ  has  been  efficient  because  of 
what  its  originators  saw  to  be  necessary,  —  supe- 
rior and  ordaining  officers,  whom  they  call  bish- 
ops, though  others  who  do  the  same  thing  do 
not  use  the  term.  The  difference  between  our 
idea  of  Episcopacy,  as  a  supervising  order,  and 
theirs,  is  that  we  hold  that  these  officers  can 
only  be  appointed  by  those  of  the  same  rank, 
who  have  power  to  do  so,  derived  in  succession 
from  the  Apostolic  source  of  the  ministry  as  the 
only  adequate  one.  They  hold  that  this  order 
can  be  created  at  any  time  without  that  condi- 
tion ;  that  is,  that  "  the  greater  can  be  blessed  of 
the  less,"  the  superior  commissioned  by  the  infe- 
rior, which  to  us  seems  illogical  and  inconsistent. 

So  far  we  have  seen  that  the  Apostolic  idea  of 
the  Church  is  that  of  an  organization  united  by 
a  ministry  perpetuated  from  Apostolic  initiation 
through  an  order  set  apart  for  the  purpose.  If 
this  is  so,  then  to  that  idea  we  should  conform, 
in  that  succession  we  should  be,  such  a  ministry 
we  should  have. 

But  how  is  it  with  those  Christians  that  are 
not  so  situated?  Here  we  meet  a  perennial  and 
a  much -vexed  question.  It  is  important,  and 
candor  will  not  allow  it  to  be  ignored.     Nor  is  it 


WHAT  DID  CHRIST  FOUND?  147 

right  to  do  so  when  we  know  how  many  saintly 
lives  are  lived  under  other  forms  of  Christian  pol- 
ity, how  great  and  unsurpassed  a  work  their  ad- 
herents have  done  for  God's  glory  and  for  man's 
welfare.  In  this  land,  as  far  as  visible  effects  go, 
that  work  is  beyond  what  has  been  done  by  those 
who  adhere  to  the  Apostolic  principle,  as  we  have 
defined  it. 

Now,  on  the  one  hand,  it  will  not  do  to  say 
that  this  is  a  matter  of  no  consequence.  A 
newly  originated  body,  due  to  merely  human  ac- 
tion, cannot  occupy  the  same  position  as  one 
that  traces  its  organic  life  back  to  the  action  of 
inspired  Apostles  at  Pentecost  ;  nor  can  depar- 
ture from  a  divine  standard  ever  be  a  matter  of 
indifference.  So,  if  this  idea  of  the  Church's 
organization  is  the  norm,  only  the  superficial  can 
say  that  we  might  as  well  not  have  bishops  as 
have  them.  If  it  is  the  wish  of  Christ,  learned 
through  the  Apostolic  action,  there  must  be  a 
reason  for  Episcopacy.  As  a  distinguished  re- 
cent defender  of  the  new  departure  has  said,  it 
was  "a  revolution"  when  some  Protestants  gave 
it  up  ;  and  a  revolution,  however  justifiable  when 
necessary,  means,  at  the  best,  that  which  should 
not  have  been,  if  avoidable. 

Yet,  while  ethics  forbid  us  to  admit  that  this 
departure  is  a  matter  of  no  consequence,  before 
we  can  tell  what  the  consequences  are  we  must 
take  into  consideration  some  important  facts. 

First,  we  must  ascertain  how  far  we  know  the 


148  WHAT  DID  CHRIST  FOUND? 

object  and  value  of  this  normal  form  of  ministry. 
Unless  we  know  exactly  all  its  functions,  and  all 
that  depends  upon  it,  we  cannot  tell  what  is  lack- 
ing where  it  is  absent.  Surely,  we  must  not 
hastily  claim  to  know  this.  Only  God  knows 
all  the  reasons  for  anything  He  does,  and  there- 
fore no  one  of  us  can  tell  exhaustively  what  He 
makes  dependent  upon  the  matter  of  polity,  and 
what  He  does  not. 

Again,  we  need  to  consider  the  reasons  for  de- 
parture from  the  norm,  and  to  give  to  them  their 
proper  weight.  Revolution  is  sometimes  clearly 
justifiable  ;  and  so,  in  the  circumstances  of  any 
revolt  against  established  order,  there  may  be  an 
element  of  justifiability  in  God's  sight.  Perhaps 
the  order  revolted  against  has  to  bear  some  of 
the  blame  in  the  matter,  if  blame  there  be. 

Still  further,  we  must  consider  how  far  the  his- 
tory of  such  bodies  may  have  vindicated  their 
right  to  exist.  They  who  have  saved  many  souls 
and  evangelized  a  land  are  not  to  be  set  aside  as 
having  no  standing  in  court.  Again,  we  must 
look  at  them  in  the  light  of  the  saints  that  hal- 
low their  history,  of  the  men  among  them  who, 
whether  ordained  or  not,  are  yet  prophets  of  God, 
in  the  light  of  their  success  in  doing  just  what 
the  Church  was  sent  to  do ;  and  in  that  of  the 
favor  of  God,  when  He  has,  as  St.  Peter  says, 
"given  unto  them  the  Holy  Ghost,  as  well  as 
unto  us." 

Now,  in  presence  of  these  and  still  other  con- 


WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND?  149 

siderations  that  might  be  adduced,  we  cannot,  so 
summarily  as  some  imagine,  define  the  results  of 
that  departure,  which  is  so  prevalent  about  us, 
from  the  regular  polity  of  the  Church.  But  all 
this  includes  a  wider  truth,  that  we  can  never  de- 
termine the  results  of  departure  from  any  norm 
set  forth  by  God  or  Christ,  or  the  Apostles.  The 
fact  is  that  life  is  wider  than  logic,  and  that  we 
cannot  mete  out  condemnation  or  praise  by  a 
process  of  syllogisms.  There  are  too  many  un- 
known factors,  too  many  indeterminate  ones,  in 
any  problem  of  human  conduct,  for  us  to  reduce 
it  to  terms  of  mathematical  precision.  We  can 
only  make  positive  affirmations  of  what  should 
be.  We  cannot  define  the  consequences  of  the 
disregard  thereof.  For  instance,  as  to  the  very 
fundamental  matter  of  belief  in  Christ,  the  wis- 
est and  soundest  differ  as  to  the  results  of  its 
absence  in  the  cases  of  heathen,  or  ignorant  or 
blinded  men.  How  absurd,  then,  to  dogmatize, 
as  so  many  Christians  do,  in  respect  to  the  con- 
sequences of  disregard  of  some  ordinance  or  cus- 
tom !  All  of  us  must  learn  to  see  that  in  fact 
we  know  nothing  about  negatives.  The  message 
of  Christianity  is  to  say  what  will  happen  if  cer- 
tain conditions  are  met,  not  to  define  what  will 
happen  if  they  are  not.  The  Church  is  like  a 
herald  sent  to  announce  good  news.  It  is  not 
commissioned  to  announce  the  results  of  not 
heeding  it  in  any  particular  case.  It  cannot  do 
this,  since  in  each  case  the  decision  turns  upon 


1 5  O  WHA  T  DID   CHRIS  T  FO  UND  ? 

facts  known  only  to  "  God  who  searcheth   the 
heart." 

Thus  has  the  Church  spoken,  and  thus  does 
our  branch  of  it  speak.  The  creeds  only  make 
positive  statements  :  they  make  no  reference  to 
alternatives  ;  and  the  other  standards  only  say 
what  we  believe  to  be  right  and  true  and  normal. 
Consequently,  any  Churchman  who  knows  the 
spirit  and  letter  of  his  Church  will,  by  his  strong- 
est affirmations,  mean  only  to  say  what  he  be- 
lieves to  be  the  ideal,  and  will  not  presume  to  be 
wiser  than  the  Church  by  defining  the  degree  of 
loss  incurred  by  those  who  revolt  against  any 
rule,  or  dispense  with  any  ordinance,  or  deny  any 
tenet.  It  is  for  no  one  less  than  God  to  settle 
that  :  no  one  less  can  do  it ;  and  He  may  know 
of  reasons  for  approval  when  we  should  condemn, 
or  of  condemnation  when  we  might  approve. 
"  Many  that  are  last  shall  be  first,  and  the  first 
last."  So,  our  claim  can  only  be,  that  we  stand 
in  this  land  for  a  form  of  Church  life  which  is 
that  of  a  fully  equipped  Christianity.  We  dare 
not  say,  for  we  have  no  authority  for  it  in  the 
Church's  utterances,  that  we  stand  for  an  abso- 
lute condition  of  the  divine  favor.  But  we  do 
say  that  we  stand  for  what  is  necessary  to  eccle- 
siastical efficiency  and  completeness.  We  be- 
lieve in  adhering  to  the  ideal,  since  we  can  ;  and 
we  mean  to  do  so,  convinced  that,  whether  we 
know  its  value  or  not,  it  is  the  safe  and  the  ob- 
ligatory way ;  and  for  the  sake  of  this  principle, 


WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND?  151 

and  not  out  of  narrowness,  we  cannot  compro- 
mise this  position,  nor  lower  our  standard. 

Passing  over  other  elements  in  the  Apostolic 
norm,  as  not  so  disputed,  we  now  come  to  the 
basis  of  confessional  union  which  it  sets  forth. 
We  believe  it  to  be,  in  conformity  with  our  pre- 
vious definition  of  Christianity,  union  upon  a 
creed  of  facts.  We  have  seen  how  this  is  nec- 
essary to  make  our  faith  a  Gospel.  Let  us  now 
see  how  it  is  necessary  to  any  union  among  be- 
lievers. 

Creeds  .  arose  from  the  necessity  of  defining 
the  Gospel  which  the  Church  preaches.  Origi- 
nally, it  was  stated  in  the  baptismal  formula. 
That  God  is  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  is  the 
Good  News.  But  dissensions  and  errors  called 
for  more  definiteness  if  there  was  to  be  any  real 
harmony.  It  is  ever  so.  Yet  here  we  must  dis- 
tinguish. 

It  has  been  held,  and  generally  is  held  around 
us,  that  this  amplification  of  the  baptismal  re- 
quirement must  be  a  detailing  of  doctrinal  defi- 
nitions. This  is  so  deeply  ingrained  in  the  minds 
both  of  believers  and  of  unbelievers  that  it  is 
difficult  to  make  it  clear  how  undesirable,  how 
un-apostolic  it  is,  and  how  different  is  the  posi- 
tion of  those  who  repudiate  it. 

Its  prevalence  is  due  to  the  prevalence  of  the 
idea  at  the  bottom  of  sectarianism.  That  is  the 
idea  of  which  we  spoke  when  dealing  with  the 
nature   of    Christianity,    namely,    the    exaggera- 


T  5  2  WHA  T  DID   CHRIST  FOUND  t 

tion  of  the  importance  of  correctness  of  opinion  ; 
and  an  equally  prevalent  conception  that  this  is 
attainable,  and  therefore  obligatory.  It  has  led 
to  the  idea  that  a  Christian  ought  to  hold  fault- 
less doctrines,  or  correct  inferences  from  the 
faith  once  delivered,  and  that  believers  must  be 
united  in  that  manner.  Hence  arose  sects  or 
bodies  of  believers  who  thought  that  they  had 
reached  ultimate  correctness  upon  this  or  that 
point  ;  and  who,  because  the  Church  around 
would  not  accept  its  formulas,  set  up  their  own 
tabernacles,  formed  their  own  societies,  to  pro- 
tect and  advocate  these  peculiar  tenets.  Of 
course,  each  one  devised  its  own  creed,  to  form 
the  basis  of  its  peculiar  membership  as  the  body 
that  held  the  true  message  of  Christianity  to  the 
world.  This  same  process  has  also  worked  in 
churches,  or  ancient  and  national  organizations, 
which,  in  measure  as  they  follow  it,  assume  the 
sect  position.  This  is  the  case  eminently  with 
Rome,  whose  creed  and  catechism  are  elabo- 
rately doctrinal,  and  consist  of  theological  prop- 
ositions that  define  its  particular  dogmas.  This 
process  has  been  so  general  that  it  has  come  to 
be  usually  regarded  as  the  law  of  religious  organ- 
ization, the  justification  of  separations  among 
Christians.  It  has  led  friends  and  foes  to  think 
that  Christendom  is,  and  should  be,  committed  to 
the  principle  of  unity  in  opinion  among  those 
who  worship  together. 

But  there  is  about  this  position  the  insuper- 


WHA  T  DID   CHRIST  FOUND  ?  153 

able  difficulty  that  it  makes  catholicity  impossi- 
ble. Men  will  not  agree  in  opinion.  That  is 
evident,  and  it  is  not  wrong.  Since  God  has 
constituted  us  differently  in  respect  of  mental 
powers  and  characteristics,  we  cannot  be  ex- 
pected either  to  look  at  admitted  facts  in  the 
same  way,  or  equally  to  emphasize  different  ele- 
ments in  a  common  belief.  This  latter  is  per- 
haps the  most  fruitful  source  of  variations  in 
opinion,  and  it  simply  cannot  be  avoided  ;  for 
men  are  so  made  that  one  will  attach  more  im- 
portance to  this  factor,  another  to  that,  in  a 
Christianity  that  all  may  hold  alike. 

And  beyond  this,  the  principle  of  agreement 
in  doctrinal  confessions  not  only  renders  catho- 
licity impossible  at  any  given  time,  but  also  pre- 
vents it  in  succeeding  generations.  Christians 
surely  make  progress  in  their  doctrines,  or  their 
apprehensions  of  their  faith,  with  advance  in  edu- 
cation and  spiritual  life  ;  and  what  is  thus  true 
of  an  individual  is  just  as  true  of  the  whole  body 
of  believers.  So,  on  the  basis  of  doctrinal  defini- 
tions being  the  bond  of  unity,  the  Church  would 
be  resolved  into  a  series  of  rising  and  falling 
bodies  ;  for,  if  they  who  believe  could  agree  at 
any  one  time,  still  there  would  be,  of  necessity, 
a  process  of  successive  dissolutions  and  reform- 
ations. No  union  formed  on  that  principle  can 
outlive  the  prevalence  of  transient  phases  of  re- 
ligious thought.  This  is  the  reason  why  no  sect 
can  endure,  for   a   sect    means  an  organization 


154  WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND? 

based  on  agreement  in  some  local  and  tempo- 
rary notion. 

But  all  this  should  not  be.  We  should  expect 
that  one  essential  feature  of  the  Church  would 
be  catholicity.  Surely  Christ  meant  His  disci- 
pleship  for  all  sorts  and  conditions  of  men  and 
for  all  the  ages.  Then  we  should  expect  that 
the  basis  of  union  would  be  acceptance  of  His 
Gospel,  independently  of  differences  as  to  em- 
phasis of  its  parts,  or  as  to  inborn  tendencies  in 
its  apprehension.  There  would  seem  to  be  no 
reason  why  they  should  not  worship  together, 
and  use  the  same  ordinances,  who  accept  Him 
and  His  work,  though  they  may  vary  in  opinion. 
To  put  this  concretely,  some  men  will  always 
make  more  of  God's  sovereignty,  others  more  of 
man's  freedom.  Some  will  make  more  of  sub- 
jective religion,  others  of  its  outward  aspects. 
Some  will  emphasize  the  personal  element,  oth- 
ers the  institutional.  Some  will  make  more  of 
feeling,  others  of  action  or  conduct,  others  still 
of  intelligence.  The  divisions  have  usually  oc- 
curred on  matters  like  these,  and  so  Christianity 
has  been  broken  up.  But  certainly  there  is  no 
more  warrant  for  destroying  its  unity  because  of 
such  differences  than  there  would  be  for  divid- 
ing the  state  because  of  differences  of  parties, 
or  the  family  because  of  varieties  of  opinion 
there.  In  one  case  as  in  the  other,  comprehen- 
siveness would  seem  possible  and  necessary. 

And  likewise  should   the  Church  be  catholic 


WHA  T  DID   CHRIST  FOUND  ?  I  5  5 

in  successive  stages  of  progress.  It  ought  to  be 
a  body  which  could  continue  to  proclaim  one 
message  of  Christ  and  His  Apostles  from  cen- 
tury to  century,  and  join  in  one  changeless  con- 
fession, without  dissolution  when  fuller  thought 
should  come,  or  new  glimpses  of  the  meaning  of 
the  Gospel ;  a  body  that  should  have  room  for, 
and  be  adaptable  to,  larger  and  deeper  realiza- 
tions of  what  is  meant  in  the  Gospel  of  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost ;  a  body  which  could  live 
on  without  any  necessity  of  disintegration  and 
reconstitution,  as  the  Spirit  leads  its  members 
more  and  more  into  the  truth.  But  this  is  im- 
possible if  you  insist  that  the  confessional  unity 
among  Christians  shall  be  on  the  basis  of  a  com- 
mon explanation  of  the  gospel  facts,  or  of  an 
agreement  upon  theories  of  that  redemption  in 
which  we  all  believe. 

But  it  is  possible  if  based  on  a  confession  of 
facts  in  which  all  can  agree,  though  they  differ 
in  doctrines  ;  and  that  this  is  the  idea  of  the 
Church,  that  Apostles  so  preached  Christianity, 
and  that  Paul  so  summed  up  the  Gospel,  we  have 
seen  in  our  second  lecture.  Let  it  now  suffice 
to  add  a  few  more  words.  As  we  have  seen,  it 
soon  became  apparent  that  converts,  as  well  as 
others,  needed  some  closer  statement  of  the  facts 
of  the  Gospel  than  only  the  baptismal  formula, 
and  since,  because  of  local  influences,  one  place 
called  for  one  detail,  another  for  another,  many 
creeds  arose.      Yet  all  were  short,  and  merely 


I56  WHAT  DID  CHRIST  FOUND? 

statements  of  simple  verities  regarding  Christ's 
work.  But  a  process  of  unification  speedily  be- 
gan, and  at  length  all  Christians  came  to  unite 
upon  that  statement  which  we  call  the  Apostles' 
Creed,  which  was  expanded  into  the  so-called 
Nicene,  as  an  enumeration  of  facts  in  which, 
without  imposing  any  explanations  of  them,  the 
Church  united  as  the  embodiment  of  the  Chris- 
tianity taught  by  Apostles,  and  to  be  held  in  all 
lands  and  ages.  Upon  it  believers  have  been 
agreed  ever  since,  with  unimportant  exceptions. 
In  its  place  there  can  be  none  other  devised. 
There  is  a  good  deal  said  about  new  creeds. 
Many  cry  for  them.  A  distinguished  man  has 
said  there  should  be  a  new  one  every  seven 
years.  This  is  all  based  upon  the  idea  that 
creeds  for  Christians  are  to  express  their  opin- 
ions about  the  Gospel.  In  that  case,  of  course, 
a  new  one  would  be  needed,  not  only  for  every 
day  that  a  new  light  comes,  but  for  every  new 
Christian  made.  But  to  a  creed  of  the  facts  of 
Christianity  there  can  be  no  additions,  in  it  no 
change ;  for,  while  our  apprehension  of  these 
facts  may  be  enlarged,  they  remain  changeless. 
If,  as  the  Church  founded  by  Apostles  holds, 
these  creeds  which  it  has  used  for  ages  are  a 
true  summary  of  Christianity,  then  they  will 
suffice  to  the  end  of  that  Church's  history,  for 
Jesus  Christ  is  "  the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and 
forever." 

It  is  true,  we  are  speaking  of  an  ideal  that  has 


WHA  T  DID  CHRIST  FOUND  ?  1 5 7 

been  rarely  realized,  if  at  all,  since  long-distant 
days.  Yet  it  is  the  ideal  set  forth  by  Apostles, 
and  it  is  of  value  to  show  what  it  is,  as  aiding 
us  in  our  search  for  an  ecclesiastical  home  in  a 
divided  Christianity.  We  believe  that  our  own 
Church  meets  the  norm  thus  presented,  and  that 
it  alone  thus  conforms  to  the  Apostolic  intention, 
owing  to  the  kind  Providence  of  God. 

For  baptism  or  admission  to  Church  member- 
ship, it  only  asks  assent  to  that  confession  which 
is  an  epitome  of  the  gospel  facts;  and  surely  a 
Church's  idea  of  essentials  may  be  found  in  what 
admits  to  its  privileges.  For  the  supreme  priv- 
ilege of  the  Holy  Communion  it  is  still  the  same, 
except  that  they  who  come  to  it  are  expected 
to  be  able  to  join  in  the  fuller  statement  of  the 
Nicene  Creed,  which  adds  nothing  to  the  other. 
To  show  still  further  how  the  matter  is  regarded, 
we  are  told  only  that  excommunication,  or  exclu- 
sion from  Church  privileges,  is  to  be  visited 
upon  evil  livers  and  unforgiving  persons.  That 
is,  it  only  punishes  moral  error,  not  mental  mis- 
takes. As  long  as  one  lives  consistently,  joins 
in  the  service,  and  in  the  confession  of  the  veri- 
ties held  to  constitute  the  Gospel,  he  cannot  be" 
touched  for  his  differences  of  opinion  from  oth- 
ers on  any  point. 

Now  this  is  significant  enough  to  detain  us  a 
moment,  for  it  shows  the  position  of  our  Church 
as  to  what  should  be  the  ground  of  separation, 
if  separation  there,  must  be.     It  is  not  disagree- 


158  WHAT  DID  CHRIST  FOUND? 

ment  in  convictions,  as  has  usually  been  main- 
tained, but  sinful  and  unworthy  conduct.  The 
former  principle  has  led  to  the  exclusion  from 
privileges  and  to  the  persecution  of  many  who 
adorned  the  Gospel  of  God  our  Saviour  by  their 
lives,  and  broken  up  the  fellowship  of  those  who 
had  in  common  "  the  mind  which  was  in  Christ 
Jesus  ; "  while  it  has  also  led  to  tolerating  and 
honoring  as  many  who  were  utterly  unworthy, 
simply  because  of  their  zeal  for  an  imagined  or- 
thodoxy. Not  that  errors  of  opinion  are  under- 
estimated by  us,  but  they  are  not  regarded  as  so 
serious  as  errors  of  life.  That  is,  vagaries  of  be- 
lief on  the  part  of  sincere  followers  of  Christ  are 
not  to  be  allowed  to  sever  ties  half  as  soon  as 
cruelty,  or  sordidness,  or  dishonesty,  or  mean- 
ness, or  untruthfulness,  in  those  who  only  are 
His  followers  in  profession.  Is  not  this,  the  po- 
sition of  our  Church,  the  true  one,  the  one  Christ 
would  have  taken  ?  Is  it  not  the  way  in  which 
Apostles  looked  at  the  matter  ?  See  how  the 
Christians  of  their  day  were  divided.  They  were 
far  more  divided  than  Christians  are  now.  They 
disagreed  as  to  circumcision,  and  Sabbath  obser- 
vance, and  many  other  fundamental  points  of 
ceremonial.  They  disagreed  as  to  very  impor- 
tant doctrines,  and  even  as  to  St.  Paul's  Apostle- 
ship.  Yet  they  lived  together.  They  that  erred 
in  opinion  were  instructed  ;  but  it  was  they  who 
sinned,  as  the  man  in  Corinth,  who  alone  were 
excluded  from  communion  and  fellowship.    That 


WHA  T  DID  CHRIST  FOUND  ?  I  59 

is,  the  practice  of  the  Church  at  that  time  shows 
that,  in  an  Apostolic  Church  and  in  a  Scriptural 
Church,  immorality  is  the  fundamental  reason 
for  the  rupture  of  brotherly  relations ;  that 
"  Bible  Christians,"  as  some  call  themselves, 
have  no  warrant  in  their  own  position  for  their 
schisms  and  their  separations  ;  and  that  the  New 
Testament  idea  of  comprehensiveness  of  opinion 
is  wider  than  they  seem  ever  to  remember,  wider 
indeed  than  Christians  at  the  present  day  seem 
able  to  attain  in  practice.  Would  that  Chris- 
tians had  always  remembered  this,  and  instead 
of  separating  from  others  because  of  their  dis- 
sent from  this  or  that  doctrine,  or  their  different 
estimate  of  this  or  that  ordinance,  had  been  ever 
willing  to  kneel  side  by  side  with  those  who  held 
the  same  Gospel  and  used  the  same  means  of 
grace,  allowing  only  sin  and  enmity,  that  is, 
moral  heresy,  to  be  a  bar  to  fellowship  and  sym- 
pathy ! 

As  to  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  which  may  be 
thought  to  contradict  this  assertion  in  regard  to 
the  position  of  this  Church,  suffice  it  to  say  that 
they  are  not  terms  of  membership  or  conditions 
of  privilege.  They  are  only  for  the  clergy  in 
their  work  as  teachers.  They  are  to  guide  them 
in  their  utterances,  to  mark  limits  that  individual 
opinion  is  not  to  transcend,  and  are  also  their 
protection  against  the  tyranny  of  waves  of  local 
or  temporary  opinion.  Beyond  this,  they  can  be 
changed  at  any  time.     Instead  of  being  doctrinal 


l6o  WHAT  DID   CHRIST  FOUND? 

creeds,  they  are  not  creeds  at  all  ;  are  never  re- 
cited ;  are  not  part  of  the  Prayer  Book,  but  of 
the  Ordinal  ;  and  are  no  more  the  Church's  con- 
fession than  they  are  its  message.  They  are 
transient  regulations  for  our  ministry  in  their  in- 
struction. 

This  is  the  reason  why  we  believe  that  the  po- 
sition that  we  occupy  is  the  only  possible  basis 
of  Christian  union.  There  is  a  healthy  desire 
for  a  cessation  of  divisions  among  those  who  are 
so  really  one  in  spirit  and  in  faith.  Our  Church, 
through  its  chief  pastors,  has  set  forth  its  idea 
of  reunion,  as  based  upon  these  two  features  of 
Apostolic  Christianity,  —  the  normal  form  of  the 
ministry,  and  agreement  in  the  ancient  creeds, 
We  do  not  mean  to  say  that  all  must  be  swal- 
lowed up  by  us,  as  some  think  ;  but  that  as  to 
polity,  if  there  is  to  be  organic  union,  it  can  only 
be  upon  common  acceptance  of  the  old  ways. 
This  would  seem  obvious,  since  no  general  agree- 
ment can  be  expected  upon  any  newer  or  any 
local  form.  But  what  lies  back  of  that,  and  is 
more  important,  because  more  fundamental,  is 
that  unity  can  only  be  upon  an  agreement  of 
confession  as  to  the  Gospel,  of  which  these 
creeds  are  the  only  general  and  undisputed 
statement.  Any  other  agreement  is  impossible 
and  not  to  be  desired,  for  it  would  mean  sup- 
pression of  convictions,  and  ignoring  of  unavoid- 
able differences.  But  all  Christians  can  agree 
upon  the  facts  of  the  Gospel.     All  bodies,  or  all 


WHA  T  DID  CHRIST  FOUND  ?  1 6 1 

important  ones,  do  hold  them  in  common.  And 
there  is  no  reason  why  they  should  not  come  to- 
gether upon  them,  agreeing  to  disagree  on  minor 
matters,  and  loving  each  other  none  the  less. 
This  will  be  the  first  great  step ;  after  that  we 
think  that  organic  union  should  ensue  in  com- 
mon acceptance  of  the  ancient  and  original  min- 
istry, against  which  some  have  revolted  for  rea- 
sons which,  as  we  think,  no  longer  hold  good, 
however  cogent  they  may  once  have  been. 

Whether  this  will  happen,  however,  we  know 
not.  It  is  hardly  to  be  expected,  in  view  of  the 
tenacity  of  human  opinions,  the  strength  of 
many  bodies,  and  other  difficulties  that  arise. 
Yet,  whether  it  happens  or  not,  this  is  our  mis- 
sion in  this  land,  as  we  are  persuaded,  to  rep- 
resent and  commend  the  normal  regimen  and 
creed  of  Apostolic  Christianity.  Others  have  a 
great  work  behind  them,  and  are  doing  a  great 
work  now.  But  we  believe  it  our  duty  to  adhere 
to  our  position  of  upholding,  not  only  the  full 
equipment  of  a  Church,  but  also  that  manner  of 
agreement  among  followers  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  which  alone  was  intended  in  the  Church, 
is  the  only  hope  of  the  reunion  of  true  followers 
of  the  Saviour,  and  the  only  way  in  which  one 
Gospel  can  be  preached  to  all  sorts  and  condi- 
tions of  men. 

Stand  up  bravely  for  this,  the  idea  of  the 
Church.  ft  is  not  always  understood.  Many 
within  the  Church  fail  to  understand  the  nature 


1 62  WHAT  DID  CHRIST  FOUND? 

of  their  union  and  the  fullness  of  their  freedom. 
They,  too,  seem  to  think  that  all  must  agree. 
They  want  all  to  hold  their  particular  shibboleths, 
belong  to  their  especial  party.  But  this  is  akin  to 
wishing  that  all  citizens  be  compelled  to  be  Dem- 
ocrats or  Republicans,  which  is  a  sin  against  the 
idea  of  the  state.  Yet  it  is  no  more  absurd  than 
the  endeavor  to  make  all  in  the  Church  of  one 
school  of  thought.  Unity  is  only  feasible  upon 
common  institutions  and  undisputed  facts,  out- 
side of  which  are  allowed  wide  divergencies.  Let 
no  one  narrow  this  liberty.  Resist  all  who  would 
narrow  it,  whatever  be  the  ground  they  take. 
While  all  others  are  free  to  look  at  things  in 
their  own  way,  each  is  as  free  in  his  way  ;  and 
the  Church  and  all  its  ways  and  the  creeds  be- 
long to  each  as  much  as  to  all.  Among  those  who 
use  them  and  are  loyal  to  them,  no  one  has  the 
prerogative  of  judging  or  setting  up  a  standard 
for  another.  Repudiate  such  an  attempt  as  a 
tyranny  that  violates  Church  principles. 

But  especially  is  this  peculiarity  of  our  Church 
misapprehended  by  those  without.  They  can- 
not understand  how  we,  High  Churchmen  and 
Low  Churchmen  and  Broad  Churchmen,  can  sin- 
cerely regard  each  other  as  brothers.  They  do 
not  believe  we  are  really  united,  and  think  us  un- 
candid,  or  indifferent  to  great  principles.  Out- 
siders ask :  "  How  can  you  expect  us  to  come  to 
you  as  a  relief  for  our  divisions  ?  Settle  your 
own  differences  first."    To  which  the  Churchman 


WHAT  DID  CHRIST  FOUND?  1 63 

answers  :  "  We  do  not  propose  to  settle  our  dif- 
ferences. It  is  our  glory  that  we  can  be  breth- 
ren and  work  together  without  obliterating  them. 
What  we  hold  in  common  unites  us.  What  we 
differ  upon  does  not  separate  us."  It  is  some- 
times trying  to  us  if  some  brother  Churchman  is 
carried  away  by  what  seems,  to  the  general  senti- 
ment of  our  communion,  to  be  superstitious  or 
rationalistic ;  and  our  principle  is  undoubtedly 
put  to  severe  tests.  But  men  who  are  trust- 
worthy and  devoted,  living  but  to  do  Christ's 
work,  we  cannot  exclude  from  our  sympathy. 
What  is  far  more  trying,  and  tests  more  violently 
the  bond  of  unity,  is  such  things  as  deceitfulness 
or  bigotry  or  self-righteousness.  These,  to  a  true 
Churchman,  cause  the  most  regret,  the  strongest 
aversion,  and  exert  a  repulsion  stronger  than  any 
party  ties  or  theological  lines  can  overcome.  He 
who  looks  at  the  question  in  this  way  will  find 
that  it  is  no  disadvantage,  as  some  imagine,  but 
is  on  the  contrary  a  satisfaction,  to  be  in  a 
Church  where  issues,  on  which  so  many  else- 
where separate,  cause  no  divisions  among  true 
followers  of  the  one  Lord  ;  where  deep  questions 
that  are  closed  elsewhere  are  regarded  as  open 
to  study  ;  and  where  we  can  not  only  hold  fellow- 
ship with  diverse  Christian  minds  as  well  as  with 
kindred  ones,  but  also  can  peaceably  discuss 
great  themes  in  allowable  controversy.  So  it  is 
that  we,  of  all  shades  of  thought,  holding  to  all 
forms  of  opinion,  widely  differing  on  deep  things, 


164  WHAT  DID  CHRIST  FOUND? 

can  yet  live  and  worship  and  work  in  the  unity 
of  a  common  creed,  and  can  in  sincerity,  as  with- 
out enmity,  join  in  the  same  Supper  of  the  Lord, 
in  the  same  hymns  of  praise.  We  would  not 
have  all  think  alike,  nor  require  silence  upon 
matters  that  are  open,  within  the  Church's  limits  ; 
for  by  so  doing  we  should  lose  many  whose  fel- 
lowship we  prize,  suppress  many  a  mental  activ- 
ity that  enriches  piety,  and  secure  uniformity 
only  by  a  process  of  impoverishment. 

What  do  you  agree  in,  then  ?  is  asked.  We 
agree  in  that  which  is  enough  to  bind  any  men 
together,  in  that  which  has  bound  the  Church 
together  through  the  ages  in  the  common  creed 
of  Christendom.  This  question  was  once  asked 
at  a  discussion  among  some  clergymen  and  lay- 
men of  the  Church  of  England  when  wide  di- 
vergence was  displayed  among  the  former.  At 
length  a  layman  said,  "  How  can  you  expect  us 
of  the  laity  to  heed  you  when  you  are  so  much  at 
variance  ?  Do  you  ministers  of  the  Church  agree 
in  anything?  If  so,  on  what  are  you  really 
united  ?  What  do  you  believe  ? "  Then  up  rose 
that  great  prophet,  Frederick  Denison  Maurice, 
and  impetuously  but  solemnly  said  :  "  We  be- 
lieve in  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  Maker  of 
Heaven  and  Earth  ;  and  in  Jesus  Christ,  His  only 
Son,  our  Lord,  who  was  conceived  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary  ;  suffered  under 

ntius  Pilate,  was  crucified,  dead  and  buried ; 
He  descended  into  Hell ;  the  third  day  He  rose 


WHAT  DID  CHRIST  FOUND?  165 

again  from  the  dead  ;  He  ascended  into  Heaven, 
and  sitteth  on  the  right  hand  of  God,  the  Father 
Almighty  ;  from  thence  He  shall  come  to  judge 
the  quick  and  the  dead.  We  believe  in  the 
Holy  Ghost ;  the  Holy  Catholic  Church,  the  Com- 
munion of  Saints ;  the  Forgiveness  of  sins  ;  the 
Resurrection  of  the  body  ;  and  the  Life  everlast- 


ing. 


And  this  answer,  which  was  sufficient  for  that 
inquirer,  is  sufficient  answer  to  whomsoever  asks 
us  for  what  we,  who  differ  on  so  many  points, 
hold  in  common.  It  is  that  Gospel  in  which  we 
are  one,  and  in  which  all  may  be  one ;  the  suf- 
ficient summary  of  what  Apostles  founded  the 
Church  to  confess  and  to  preach  to  every  crea- 
ture ;  sufficient  to  guide  and  to  sustain  us  as  we 
walk  by  faith  and  not  by  sight  in  "  the  way  that 
leadeth  unto  life." 


LECTURE  VI. 

WHAT    IS    THEOLOGY  ? 

"Grow  in  grace,  and  in  the  knowledge  of  our  Lord  and  Sav- 
iour Jesus  Christ :  to  Him  be  glory."  —  2  Pet.  hi.  18. 

The  Church  of  Christ  has  a  twofold  duty  to 
fulfill.  On  the  one  hand  is  its  practical  duty  : 
to  spread  the  Gospel  through  the  world,  and 
build  up  the  Kingdom  of  God  in  the  hearts  of 
men.  On  the  other  is  its  intellectual  duty  :  to 
apprehend  more  and  more  fully  the  wealth  that 
is  in  that  Gospel,  to  gain  a  deeper  insight  into 
the  significance  of  the  facts  that  constitute  it. 
This  is  Theology. 

It  is  not  the  aim  of  this  lecture  to  teach  The- 
ology, which  is  a  subject  not  only  too  extensive, 
but  also  one  that  can  hardly  be  expected  to  re- 
ceive in  detail  the  attention  of  those  addressed, 
since  it  requires  a  training  and  a  study  that  can 
only  be  looked  for  in  those  who  are  especially 
called  thereto.  The  laity  may  be,  but  need  not 
be,  theologians  in  this  Church  to  which  we  be- 
long. The  reasons  for  this  will  be  manifest  as 
we  proceed. 

But  the  purpose  of  this  lecture  is  to  state  what 
Theology  is,  its  nature,  its  aim,  and  its  achieve- 


WHAT  IS    THEOLOGY?  \6f 

ments,  as  well  as  possible  within  the  limits  at 
our  command.  In  so  doing,  we  must  recur 
again  to  the  truth  dwelt  upon  in  defining  Chris- 
tianity, for,  as  was  then  said,  all  other  topics  are 
affected  by  that  definition.  We  saw  that  Chris- 
tianity is  a  collection  of  facts,  and  that  faith  is 
resting  upon  them.  Now  it  is  to  be  expected 
that  men,  constituted  as  they  are,  would  en- 
deavor to  understand  these  facts  which  were 
committed  to  the  Church  for  proclamation  by 
the  Apostolic  men  who  founded  it.  The  mere 
power  of  curiosity,  the  desire  for  intelligent 
faith  and  clearer  knowledge,  would  make  this 
certain  to  occur.  They  who  would  oppose  this 
desire  only  fight  against  the  wind.  Men  will 
not  cease  to  inquire,  and  though  some  may,  in 
unnecessary  despair,  say  that  it  is  of  no  use, 
and  others,  in  a  spirit  of  skepticism,  that  it  is 
dealing  but  with  words  or  dreams ;  the  Christian 
will  ever  strive  after  a  full  and  systematic  under- 
standing of  his  faith,  not  from  mere  curiosity, 
for  this  inquiry  will  always  be  pushed,  as  it 
always  has  been,  from  a  higher  motive,  —  from 
duty.  A  sense  of  duty  has  been  at  the  bottom 
of  all  theological  labor  in  the  earnest  and  holy 
minds  of  the  past.  And  this  duty  is  twofold. 
In  the  first  place,  it  is  a  duty,  for  God's  sake, 
to  fathom  more  deeply  the  revelation  in  Christ. 
This  is  a  treasure  to  be  prized  and  all  its  beauty 
known.  If  it  be  a  disclosure  of  God  and  His 
ways,  honor  to  Him  requires  us  to  learn  all  that 


l6S  WHAT  IS    THEOLOGY? 

it  can  tell  us.  In  the  second  place,  the  proper 
preaching  of  the  Gospel  demands  the  study  of 
Theology.  That  preaching  must  be  as  clear  and 
as  harmonious  as  possible,  made  adaptable  to 
varied  minds  and  ages,  fitted  for  those  of  ad- 
vanced, as  well  as  those  of  undeveloped  stages 
of  culture.  But  this  means  that  the  Gospel,  to 
be  thus  proclaimed,  must  be  thought  upon,  its 
factors  developed  by  reflection,  its  implications 
discovered  by  investigation. 

Therefore,  in  any  event,  this  study  of  the  veri- 
ties of  the  faith  would  have  been  obligatory. 
Whatever  the  career  of  the  Church,  however 
normal  or  unruffled,  still  the  very  inherent  spirit 
of  Christianity  would  have  led  of  necessity  to 
theological  inquiry. 

But  the  history  of  the  Church  has  not  been 
normal.  It  has  been  a  history  of  conflict  without 
and  within ;  of  antagonism  with  those  who  have 
rejected  it,  and  of  peril  at  the  hands  of  those  who 
have  misinterpreted  it.  The  faith  has  needed 
defining  for  its  protection,  and  the  exercise  of 
solicitude  to  avert  corruptions,  whether  by  denial 
of  the  true,  or  by  addition  of  the  false.  This 
means  laborious  study.  No  one's  opinion  who 
has  not  considered  the  matter  in  issue  is  of  value 
on  any  subject.  The  study  of  theology  has  been 
the  effort  to  protect  and  expound  those  Christian 
verities  which  are  "  the  power  of  God  unto  salva- 
tion." Christian  thinking  and  living  —  for  living 
is  based  upon  thinking  —  have  gone  astray,  far 


WHA  T  IS    THEOL OGY?  1 69 

enough  and  often  enough,  and  perhaps  theolog- 
ical effort  has  at  times  done  the  same  ;  but  who 
can  tell  how  far  this  wandering  would  have  gone 
if  there  had  been  no  Theology  ?  This  is,  then, 
the  intellectual  task  of  the  Church,  as  distinct 
from  its  practical  one,  a  work  parallel  and  con- 
current with  its  labor  in  the  world  and  in  the 
hearts  of  men  ;  and  it  is  not  surprising  that,  as 
in  these  other  respects,  so  in  this  one,  the  work 
has  not  been  perfectly  done.  Yet  who  will  say 
that  it  were  better  had  none  of  these  tasks  been 
undertaken  ? 

In  approaching  the  theme,  there  comes  at 
once  before  our  minds  the  vastness  of  the  field 
denoted  by  the  word  "  Theology."  Its  literature 
is  of  such  extent  that  it  is  almost  appalling.  It 
probably  exceeds  that  of  any  other  department 
of  human  activity.  For  ages  it  was  almost  the 
only  literature  produced.  To-day  it  is  that 
branch  to  which  more  volumes  are  annually 
added  than  to  any  other.  Some  tell  us  that  re- 
ligion is  dying  out,  and  that  interest  in  it  is  on 
the  wane.  It  does  not  look  so,  when  we  see  the 
proportion  of  work  done  by  the  printing-press  in 
its  behalf  in  every  land. 

This  literature  may  be  divided  into  several 
great  departments.  These  are  :  Exegetical  Theol- 
ogy, which  deals  with  the  documents  of  Chris- 
tianity ;  Historical,  which  deals  with  its  prepara- 
tion and  its  career ;  Practical,  which  treats  of  the 
application  of  it,  including  the  pastoral  work  and 


170  WHAT  IS    THEOLOGY? 

worship  ;  Evidential,  or  that  which  defends  and 
vindicates  the  faith  ;  and  Doctrinal,  or  that  which 
discusses  its  tenets.  This  last  is  what  is  usually 
meant  by  the  term  Theology,  and  is  often  called 
Systematic  Divinity  or  Dogmatic  Theology.  In 
this  department,  also,  the  work  achieved  has  been 
the  most  extensive,  and  the  most  intellectually 
eminent.  There  the  greatest  minds  have  done 
their  greatest  work,  and  have  won  an  almost  peer- 
less distinction.  Whatever  may  be  said  of  other 
human  activity  in  the  realm  of  thought,  or  how- 
ever we  may  agree  with  them,  such  men  as  Ori- 
gen  and  Athanasius,  Augustine  and  Anselm,  have 
few  fellows  and  no  superiors.  They  have  dealt 
with  the  highest  themes  to  which  the  mind  can 
address  itself ;  and,  however  successful  we  may 
think  the  effort,  we  must  admit  that  its  partici- 
pants have  been  giants.  It  has  had  workers  of  all 
schools  of  thought,  and  among  all  sorts  of  men. 
It  has  made  serviceable  to  itself  every  tongue 
that  has  been  capable  of  serving  it,  every  gift  that 
man  possesses,  every  science  that  he  has  devised, 
every  art  that  progress  has  evolved.  Now,  what 
is  it  all  worth  ?  Has  all  this  work  been  in  vain  ? 
Is  all  this  literature  only  of  such  stuff  as  dreams 
are  made  of  ?  Some  tell  us  so.  But  perhaps  a 
few  words  about  it  may  show  it  to  be  not  so 
valueless  as  they  suppose  ;  and  -may  also  show 
that  it  has  not  all  the  value  that  some  others 
may  have  ascribed  to  it.  For,  perhaps  the  exag- 
geration of  its  worth  is  at  the  bottom  of  a  good 


WHA  T  IS   THE OLOGY?  1 7 1 

deal  of  its  depreciation.  Let  us  see  just  what  it 
is,  and  so  shall  we  see  what  it  is  worth. 

Theology  is  a  science.  What  is  a  science  ? 
It  is  the  work  of  investigating  the  facts  in  the 
field  under  consideration,  classifying  them,  and 
generalizing  from  them.  It  is  the  effort  to  ad- 
vance in  the  real  knowledge  of  things,  beyond 
what  mere  observation  discerns.  There  are  two 
kinds  of  sciences.  The  so-called  exact  ones  deal 
with  precise  data  and  inexorable  sequences,  and 
lead,  if  properly  pursued,  to  sure  and  necessary 
conclusions.  But,  as  the  word  is  generally  used, 
it  refers  to  another  kind  of  work  altogether,  that 
of  the  inexact  sciences.  Their  work  is  the  in- 
vestigation and  correlation  of  data  that  are  not 
precise,  like  the  axioms  of  mathematics,  but  only 
matters  of  observation,  such  as  the  rocks,  the 
flowers,  the  animals,  or  the  acts  and  experiences 
of  men.  Now,  of  course,  no  observation  is  com- 
plete or  precise  in  any  case,  nor  is  any  number  of 
observations  ever  exhaustive.  We  do  not  know 
all  about  any  one  flower,  and  still  less  about  all 
flowers.  Consequently  science  must  be  always 
inexact  when  it  is  thus  dealing  with  facts. 

Theology  is  a  science  of  this  sort,  and  just  as 
truly  a  science  as  any  other  on  the  list.  It  is 
the  study  of  the  facts  in  the  Christian  field,  with 
all  the  helps  available.  These  are  primarily,  of 
course,  the  Apostolic  and  other  sacred  writings 
whence  we  chiefly  get  the  data  of  our  study. 
But  this  is  not  all.     There  are  also  the  Apostolic 


172  WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY? 

traditions  and  institutions.  Then  there  are  the 
aids  of  spiritual  insight,  and  of  the  experience  of 
those  who  have  lived  in  the  light  of  the  facts  that 
are  studied.  And  we  also  have  philosophy  in 
its  many  forms,  history,  and  other  sources  still  to 
which  we  may  go.  All  these  are  the  equipment 
for  this  labor  to  which  God  calls  His  people. 
But  the  labor  has  three  aims.  One  is,  to  gain 
ever  deeper  apprehensions  of  the  significance  of 
the  verities  of  the  faith.  What  does  it  mean 
that  God  is  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost  ? 
What  does  it  mean  that  the  First  creates  and 
cares  for  us,  that  the  Second  saves,  and  that  the 
Third  sanctifies  ?  What  does  the  Forgiveness 
of  Sins  mean  ?  What  does  the  promise  of  Resur- 
rection mean  ?  Such  are  a  few  out  of  countless 
questions  that  are  raised  by  the  Creed  which  the 
Church  repeats  in  every  service.  Secondly,  this 
science  seeks  to  classify  these  facts,  to  show 
their  relations  to  one  another  ;  for  any  one  truth 
must  involve  all  other  truths,  and  cast  light  upon 
them.  Third,  —  and  this  is  the  practical  object 
of  the  science,  —  it  seeks  to  proclaim  or  apply 
these  facts,  the  better  to  learn  their  value  and 
their  use.  Geology  or  chemistry  or  anatomy  are 
pursued,  or  should  be,  in  order  to  use  the  results 
attained  for  the  benefit  of  mankind  and  the  glory 
of  God.  There  is  no  justification  of  any  study 
unless  this  is  the  object.  And  so  Theology  has, 
as  its  aim,  not  only  the  fuller  possession  of  divine 
truth,  but  also  greater  efficiency  in  bringing  that 
truth  to  bear  upon  the  hearts  and  lives  of  men. 


WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY?  1 73 

This  statement  assumes,  of  course,  that  we 
have  such  facts  to  work  upon  ;  that  the  Creed  of 
Christendom,  regarding  the  person  and  work  of 
Christ,  is  true. 

Our  premises  may  be  denied  in  different  ways. 
There  may  be,  in  the  first  place,  a  flat  repudiation 
of  the  reality  of  the  Christian  facts.  This  objec- 
tion is  met  by  the  evidences  of  Christianity. 
We  have  treated  this,  and  have  seen  that  these 
facts  are  involved  in  the  reality  of  Jesus  Christ ; 
for,  if  real,  no  one  questions  His  veracity.  We 
have  also  seen  that  His  reality  is,  perhaps,  the 
most  undeniable  event  in  human  history ;  not  a 
matter  of  the  remote  past,  but  one  in  which  we 
and  the  world  are  living  and  moving  to-day ;  a 
present,  actual  factor  in  our  daily  life,  from  the 
time  we  get  up  until  we  return  to  our  bed,  since 
all  about  us,  and  even  within  us,  is  what  it  is  be- 
cause of  Christ.  We  have  seen  that  one  might 
more  easily  doubt  the  actuality  of  any  other  fac- 
tor in  current  affairs  than  that  of  Him  whose 
existence  and  agency  all  Christendom  manifests, 
whose  name  is  stamped  on  the  brow  of  our  civil- 
ization, as  far  as  it  is  good  or  elevated. 

Again,  the  denial  of  our  premises  may  be  based 
upon  the  a  priori  objections  of  agnosticism, 
which  says  that  God  cannot  communicate  any 
truth  to  us,  or  that  we  could  not  apprehend  it  if 
the  effort  were  made  to  give  it.  That  is,  this 
denial  says  in  limine  that,  whatever  may  be  the 
case  with  the  verity  of  the  events  we  believe  in, 


174  WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY? 

there  is  in  them  no  real  knowledge  of  God,  and 
therefore  no  real  basis  for  a  theological  science. 
Such  facts  as  we  claim  to  have  are  either  utterly 
imaginary,  or  else  so  affected  by  human  limita- 
tions and  preconceptions  as  to  have  no  value  to 
argue  from.  Even  if  there  have  been  disclosures 
of  the  divine  disposition  and  purposes,  even  if 
God  has  sent  us  communications  through  Christ, 
yet  they  are  so  modified  in  the  process  of  their 
presentation,  or  so  modified  in  their  apprehension 
by  us,  that  we  know  not  what  they  are  worth. 

Of  course,  if  in  Christianity  "  things  are  not 
what  they  seem,"  then  our  beliefs  are  false  and 
there  can  be  no  Theology,  any  more  than  there 
can  be  a  science  of  botany  based  upon  obser- 
vation through  discoloring  or  distorting  lenses. 
But  is  this  true  ?  To  admit  it  means  manifestly 
the  surrender  of  all  we  rest  upon.  If  what  we 
call  the  love  and  the  holiness  and  the  mercy  of 
God  are  not  what  those  words  convey  to  us,  then 
it  is  difficult  to  see  any  value  in  them.  They  are 
counterfeits,  and  we  have  not  what  we  want  for 
our  redemption  and  comfort,  nor  any  actual 
knowledge  of  God  at  all.  Then  Christianity  falls 
to  pieces.  Of  course  all  faith  must  cease ;  and 
at  last  all  religion,  even  mere  reverence,  goes  by 
the  board,  for  we  can  hold  no  relations  with  an 
unknown  object.  But  we  are  hardly  prepared 
for  this.  It  lands  us  where  no  one  will  go,  in  the 
position  that  we  know  really  nothing  about  any- 
body or  anything :  for  there  is  as  much  reason 


WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY?  1 75 

to  be  sure  of  the  correctness  of  divine  facts  as 
of  any  other  ;  as  much  reason  to  believe  that  we 
can  know  God  as  that  we  can  know  a  friend,  for 
the  one  can  reveal  Himself  to  us  if  the  other 
can.  The  facts  about  God  are  really  more,  and 
and  not  less,  certain  than  those  of  other  sorts  ; 
at  any  rate  they  are  so  to  some  of  us,  whose  cer- 
titude is  found  in  inward,  not  in  outward  tests. 
For  as  we  only  know  of  any  person  what  he 
manifests  by  his  word  or  deed,  so  we  believe 
that  the  self-revelation  of  God  is  the  only  one 
which  is  full,  faultless,  and  free  from  all  possibil- 
ity of  error.  The  best  of  men  and  the  fondest 
of  friends  may  shrink  from  telling  the  secrets  of 
his  heart,  may  under  strong  temptation  deceive ; 
but  whatever  comes  from  God  must  disclose  Him 
exactly  as  He  is. 

There  is  still  a  more  conclusive  argument  than 
this.  The  whole  matter  of  the  trustworthiness 
of  the  facts  regarding  God  that  are  included  in 
the  Creed  of  Christendom,  turns  upon  the  verac- 
ity of  Jesus  Christ.  There  are  two  things  which 
He  clearly  said.  One  was  that  we  can  know 
God  ;  the  other  that  He  correctly  revealed  Him. 
His  entire  mission  implied  the  possibility  of  our 
receiving  divine  disclosures  :  that  is  to  say,  He 
who  is  the  highest  authority  among  the  sons  of 
men  on  things  spiritual  and  religious,  affirmed 
the  falseness  of  agnosticism.  Carlyle,  whom  we 
quoted  once  before,  said  that  "  no  man's  opinion 
is  worth  anything  when  it  conflicts  with  that  of 


i;6  WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY? 

Jesus  Christ."  This  is  perfectly  true.  There- 
fore if  any  one  tell  us  that  revelation  is  not  pos- 
sible, or  that  our  reception  of  it  is  not  possible, 
though  he  be  some  wise  and  learned  son  of  cul- 
ture, we  can  simply  reply  that  Jesus  taught  other- 
wise. After  that,  it  makes  little  difference  what 
any  one  else  says.  We  need  not  trouble  our- 
selves to  resort  to  arguments  for  the  knowability 
of  eternal  and  absolute  truth,  though  there  are 
plenty  of  them,  when  that  One  who  is  wiser  than 
any  sage,  profounder  than  any  philosopher,  de- 
clared it.  To  contradict  Him  in  the  realm  of 
religious  and  metaphysical  thought,  is  presump- 
tuous, and  marks  the  folly  of  the  man  who  does 
so.  For,  if  not  a  Saviour,  He  is,  at  least,  a  wiser 
teacher  than  any  one  else  who  has  undertaken 
to  teach  mankind.  How  much  more  is  He,  to 
those  who  regard  Him  as  the  Incarnate  Word 
of  God !  But  He  went  beyond  this.  He  said 
that  what  He  disclosed  of  God  was  correct  :  not 
divine  truth  so  affected  by  human  conditions  as 
to  be  untrustworthy.  He  said,  "  He  that  hath 
seen  Me  hath  seen  the  Father  ; "  "  The  words 
that  I  speak  unto  you,  they  are  spirit  and  they 
are  life  ; "  "  No  man  cometh  unto  the  Father 
but  by  Me ; "  "I  am  the  way,  the  truth,  and  the 
life  ; "  "  He  that  is  of  the  truth  heareth  my 
voice."  These  are  only  a  few  of  many  utter- 
ances that  affirm  or  imply  that  the  revelation 
that  we  have  in  Him  is  one  of  real,  actual  truths 
regarding  the  nature  and  the  character  of  God, 


WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY?  IJJ 

that  which  is  highest  and  most  essential  in  God ; 
and  that  we,  as  made  in  His  image,  are  capable 
of  appreciating  and  receiving  them. 

Agnosticism  has  done  the  good  work  of  show- 
ing that  we  cannot,  through  philosophy  and  spec- 
ulation, reach  a  knowledge  of  the  attributes  and 
inner  life  of  God,  of  His  infinite  qualities  as  the 
Self-existent  One  wherein  He  is  unlike  us.  But 
it  has  not  shown,  and  it  is  not  within  its  power 
to  show,  that  what  He  is,  in  His  personal  life 
and  characteristics,  Cannot  be  known  by  faith  in 
His  Son.  And  these  are  the  facts  with  which 
Theology  deals.  The  verities  of  the  Creed  we 
hold  and  live  by  are  verities  regarding  them. 
The  rest  is  of  little  moment.  The  important 
thing  is,  that  we  have  in  Christ  an  actual  disclos- 
ure of  God  as  to  His  heart,  His  character,  and 
His  relations  to  His  creatures.  So  Theology  is 
a  science  of  facts  as  certain,  to  those  who  be- 
lieve, as  are  the  facts  which  are  ascertained  by 
the  senses.  It  is  real  knowledge,  not  accommo- 
dated or  conventional,  or  incomprehensible  for- 
mulae of  God  and  His  ways. 

But  it  is  not  complete,  we  are  told.  What  of 
that  ?  What  knowledge  is  complete  ?  Who  will 
claim  that  any  fact  in  any  science  is  fully  known, 
either  in  itself  or  in  its  relations  ?  Who  has  an 
exhaustive  acquaintance  with  a  single  insect  or  a 
single  rock  ?  It  may  be  that  these  facts  of  the 
Gospel  are  even  less  known  than  those  of  nature. 
Their  very  character  may  leave  a  larger  fringe 


I78  WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY? 

of  mystery  about  them.  This  is  not  certain, 
since,  in  the  fringe  about  the  lowliest  fact  of  na- 
ture, or  the  simplest  one  of  experience,  there  is 
included  all  of  God,  if  we  may  so  speak;  and 
when  we  pass  into  the  higher  spheres  of  inquiry 
and  deal  with  life,  we  deal  with  a  still  larger  ele- 
ment of  the  unknown.  Biology  brings  us  facts 
more  remote  from  our  grasp  than  chemistry. 
So,  while  it  is  true  that  it  is  difficult  to  determine 
the  comparative  degree  of  mystery  in  any  case, 
yet  we  may  say  that,  when  we  deal  with  the  na- 
ture and  acts  of  God,  there  are  still  more  un- 
solved questions,  there  are  still  more  reserved 
possibilities  of  disclosure.  This  may  be  a  disad- 
vantage for  Theology  when  contrasted  with  the 
sciences  of  the  phenomena  that  the  senses  ap- 
prehend, and  may  cause  us  to  feel  a  greater  de- 
gree of  possible  error  in  our  inductions.  It 
should  undoubtedly  make  us  more  cautious  and 
less  dogmatic  in  our  inferences. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  an  advantage 
peculiar  to  this  science,  which  is  the  power  to 
verify  our  processes,  the  possession  of  standards 
by  which  to  detect  errors.  These  are  found  in 
the  person  and  teachings  and  spirit  of  Christ,  as 
recorded  in  the  New  Testament.  As  all  science 
consists  in  the  combination  of  the  data  reasoned 
from  with  the  process  of  reasoning,  so,  while  our 
data  may  be  more  incomplete  than  those  of  other 
sciences,  we  yet  possess  what  none  of  them  have, 
and  what  their  devotees  would  give  anything  to 


WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY?  1 79 

acquire,  —  a  criterion  by  which  we  can  tell  what 
is  inconsistent  and  inadmissible  in  our  processes. 
The  manifestation  of  God  in  Christ  will,  if  borne 
in  mind,  save  us  from  what  may  at  any  time  hap- 
pen to  the  student  of  any  other  science  —  from 
falling  into  conclusions  that  are  antagonistic  to 
the  very  truth  that  is  the  subject  of  our  study. 

That  this  has  not  always  been  remembered,  is 
most  evident.  Forgetfulness  of  the  principle, 
that  anything  affirmed  of  God  must  be  in  har- 
mony with  the  spirit  and  words  of  Jesus,  has  led 
to  conclusions  that  are  abhorrent.  Logic  has 
maintained  them,  and  partisanship  has  accepted 
them,  but  they  are  nevertheless  condemned  by 
the  norm  which  ought  to  be  supreme  to  the 
Christian.  As  evident  is  the  injury  that  this  for- 
getfulness has  produced.  Believers  have  been 
perplexed ;  the  head  and  the  heart  have  been 
placed  in  conflict.  Many  have  turned  away  from 
all  definite  belief  because,  as  it  has  been  pre- 
sented too  frequently,  it  seemed  incompatible 
with  the  supremacy  of  conscience.  Unbelievers 
have  been  given  a  plausible  argument  in  the  af- 
firmation that  such  conclusions  are  identical  with 
Christian  truth  ;  for,  their  overthrow  being  easy, 
Christianity  goes  with  them.  Many  a  man,  un- 
able to  discriminate  between  the  faith  and  false 
inferences  from  it,  has  been  alienated  from  the 
Gospel  because  of  harsh  and  immoral  doctrines 
that  were  alleged  to  be  part  of  it.  This  could 
not  have  happened  had  the  standard  of  Christian 


l8o  WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY? 

study  been  observed,  that  nothing  can  be  true  of 
God  which  does  not  harmonize  with  His  mani- 
festation in  Christ.  It  is  in  measure  as  this  has 
been  adhered  to  that  progress  has  been  made, 
and  in  that  measure  alone. 

Let  it  be  so  with  us.  Let  us  say  nothing,  be- 
lieve nothing,  that  Jesus  would  not  have  said, 
that  is  not  in  accord  with  His  life  and  utterances. 
Let  no  authority  nor  any  reasoning  gain  our  sub- 
mission in  such  an  issue.  Let  others  see  that 
we  can  make  "  the  mind  of  Christ  "  supreme, 
and  so  shall  we  commend  the  Gospel  to  many  a 
bewildered  mind.  Thus  alone  can  the  Church 
do  this  same  thing.  The  world  may  not  regard 
Christ  as  it  should,  but  it  has  at  any  rate  that 
idea  of  God  which  He  has  given  to  it  ;  and  it 
justly  says  that  such  doctrines  as  a  stern  or  an 
unmerciful  or  an  unethical  Theology  would  teach 
are  ipso  facto  false,  because  dishonoring  to  Him 
who  is  above  all  things  tender,  just,  and  loving. 

Whitefield  and  Wesley  were  once  arguing  for 
and  against  the  system  called  Calvinism,  the  for- 
mer being  an  unshrinking  advocate  of  it.  The 
latter  pushed  the  former  until  he  consistently  ad- 
mitted that  God  acted  only  for  His  own  glory, 
with  no  assignable  reasons  for  His  dealing  dif- 
ferently with  different  men.  Then  Wesley  ex- 
claimed :  "  Your  God  is  my  Devil."  And  he  was 
right  ;  for  that  idea  of  God  which  some  have 
taught,  though  few  have  held  it  in  their  hearts, 
is  just  what  the  ethical  mind,  the  one  taught  of 


WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY?  l8l 

Jesus,  means  by  Satan,  —  a  being  who  acts  arbi- 
trarily, without  reason  and  without  love. 

So  we  come  back  to  our  definition  of  Theol- 
ogy, that  it  is  the  science  of  Christian  facts,  the 
process  of  their  elucidation  in  accord  with  the 
spirit  of  Christ. 

Here  we  meet  two  classes  of  critics.  On  the 
one  hand,  there  are  those  who  tell  us  that  the 
conclusions  of  Theology  are  of  no  real  validity, 
and  then,  pointing  to  its  conflicting  utterances, 
say  that  this  shows  how  all  Christianity  is  guess- 
work after  all  :  if  there  is  all  this  uncertainty  in 
one  part  of  it,  there  is  no  certainty  anywhere. 
But  this  is  to  say  what  would  be  ridiculed  in 
other  matters.  There  is  just  the  same  certainty, 
and  there  is  just  the  same  uncertainty,  as  in  any 
other  department  of  study.  There  is  no  cer- 
tainty in  your  science,  whatever  it  be,  we  tell 
such  a  man,  nothing  settled  and  final.  There  is 
not  a  scientific  proposition  of  any  sort  or  kind  of 
which  that  can  be  affirmed.  A  scientific  state- 
ment means  only  that  which  is  the  best  formula- 
tion of  facts  up  to  date.  To-morrow  may  bring 
new  facts  which  will  demand  a  totally  different 
formula,  or  it  may  bring  new  light  on  old  ones 
which  will  revolutionize  any  generalization  in  ex- 
istence. Inductions  are  but  working  hypotheses. 
All  that  is  fixed  is  the  facts  themselves,  the  flow- 
ers, the  stones,  the  stars,  the  living  creatures, 
the  events,  that  are  studied.  They  are  certain, 
but  nothing  is  certain  in  what  the  science  may 


1 82  WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY? 

teach  about  their  meaning  and  their  relations. 
And  so  Theology  has  the  same  certainty  in  its 
facts  and  the  same  uncertainty  in  its  inferences. 
There  may  be  no  more  reason  for  accepting  its 
results  than  those  of  any  other  science,  but  if  no 
more,  there  is  at  least  as  much,  for  they  are  due 
to  the  working  of  the  same  human  intelligence. 
But  there  is  no  more  reason  for  rejecting  its  data 
because  our  reasonings  are  fallible,  or  because 
former  positions  are  abandoned,  than  there  was 
for  denying  that  the  planetary  system  was  real 
when  Copernicus  overthrew  the  astronomy  of  pre- 
vious ages.  It  may  be,  and  probably  is,  the  fault 
of  Christians  that  so  many  seem  involved  in  this 
confusion  of  thought  ;  but  at  any  rate  many  an 
opponent  of  our  faith  needs  to  learn  to  distin- 
guish between  the  sure  and  redeeming  facts  of 
the  Church's  Creed  and  the  tentative  or  scien- 
tific efforts  to  explain  them.  We  can  live  on, 
sustained,  comforted,  saved  by  the  Gospel,  apart 
from  any  theologizing  ;  just  as  well  as  the  hungry 
man  can  find  nourishment  in  food  without  any 
acquaintance  with  organic  chemistry,  or  the  pro- 
cesses of  nutrition. 

But  others  will  now  retort,  from  a  different 
quarter,  no  certainty  in  Theology  ?  Do  you  dare 
affirm  this  ?  I  dare  affirm  what  your  Church 
and  my  Church  teaches.  If  anything  is  evident, 
it  is  that  the  Church  does,  as  it  must,  indorse  no 
Theology,  commit  itself  to  no  scientific  results, 
and  therein   it   shows  that  it   is  Apostolic   and 


WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY?  1 83 

Catholic.     There  are   many  systems  or   schools 
of  Christian  thought  within  the  allowable  limits 
of   adherence   to  the    Creed   and    Prayer   Book. 
There  are  many  theories  of  particular  subjects, 
such  as  sacraments,  ministry,  atonement,  escha- 
tology,  and  others  more  or  less  important,  many 
theories   even  of   the  very  organization   of   the 
Church.     But   the  Church  identifies  itself   with 
none,  regards  all  as  only  approximate  at  the  best, 
and  authorizes  no  man  to  speak  for  it  as  to  the 
final  definition  of  anything.     It  is  the  same  as  in 
the  State.     This  is  committed  to  no  theory  or 
explanation  of   its  organic  facts,  no  science  of 
government,  no  formula  of  social  or  political  sci- 
ence.    There  are  men,  it  is  true,  who  say  that 
their  party  is  the  only  allowable  one,   and  the 
authorized  definer  of  constitutional  data  ;  and  so 
there  are  men  who  say  that  their  ism  or  their 
theological   affirmations    are    the   voice   of    the 
Church,  their   doxy  is   orthodoxy.     But   as  the 
State,  so  the  Church  frowns  or  smiles  on  such 
people  according  to  their  importance,  and  goes 
on,  with  no  syllable  of  sanction  for  their  claim, 
keeping  itself  clear  of  responsibility  for  the  stam- 
mering and  transient  utterances  of  presumptu- 
ous men. 

It  leaves  all  that  to  sects.  The  idea  of  a  sect, 
as  has  been  stated  elsewhere,  is,  that  it  is  com- 
mitted to  some  form  of  Christian  thought,  or  to 
the  especial  emphasis  of  some  particular  Chris- 
tian verity.     There  may  have  been   some  good 


1 84  WHAT  IS    THEOLOGY? 

resulting  from  such  bodies,  especially  when  they 
think  it  their  duty  to  testify  to  forgotten  or  ob- 
scured truths.  But  the  Church  idea  is  to  allow 
no  form  of  thought  to  be  made  binding  upon  its 
members.  It  says  that  they  all  are  but  scientific 
efforts  to  arrive  at  truth,  and  therefore  not  final 
attainments.  It  does  this  for  two  reasons.  One 
is  that,  ever  mindful  of  the  limitations  of  human 
capacity  in  any  sphere  of  study,  it  is  especially 
so  as  to  this  study  of  the  divine  verities  of  its 
Creed,  and  consequently  insists  that  no  formula, 
no  generalization,  is  ultimate,  or  ever  can  be,  on 
the  lips  of  creatures  speaking  of  their  Creator. 
That  is,  the  Church  allows  no  autocracy  of  logic 
in  theology.  Perhaps  the  greatest  evil  in  the 
history  of  Christendom  has  been  the  claim  to 
argue  to  irreversible  conclusions  with  binding 
effect.  For  instance,  because  God's  sovereignty 
is  a  truth,  therefore  immoral  doctrines  of  predes- 
tination and  thinly  disguised  fatalism  are  made 
matters  of  faith ;  because  baptism  is  of  divine 
appointment,  therefore  there  is  no  salvation  with- 
out it  ;  because  Christ  died  for  our  sins,  accord- 
ing to  the  Scriptures,  therefore  it  was  to  ap- 
pease a  wrathful  God.  Such  are  specimens  of 
the  use  of  that  little  word  ergo,  which  has  led  to 
intolerable  tenets  and  to  cruel  persecutions  and 
unchristian  schisms.  But  this  is  all  due  to  for- 
getting that,  as  in  any  other  science  that  deals 
with  facts,  logic  is  of  imperfect  obligation  or 
value ;    since,  the   data    being    but    imperfectly 


WHAT  IS    THEOLOGY?  185 

known  as  far  as  we  have  them,  and  only  partial 
also,  we  cannot  reach  certain  conclusions.  We 
can  never  draw  perfect  conclusions  from  imper- 
fect premises ;  yet  such  are  all  our  premises 
when  we  deal  with  divine  things,  even  more  than 
in  the  realm  of  nature.  Before  we  can  draw  a 
binding  inference  from  the  verities  of  our  faith, 
we  must  have  a  certainty  that  we  comprehend 
the  latter  in  all  their  relations,  which  the  Church 
never  presumes  to  affirm. 

Sometimes  this  claim  to  pursue  inferences  un- 
erringly assumes  grotesque  forms  in  serious 
men's  utterances.  Not  only  in  works  of  system- 
atic theology,  as  they  are  called,  but  in  single 
statements,  we  meet  with  an  assumption  of  ac- 
quaintance with  deep  things  that  is  appalling. 
Perhaps  the  climax  was  reached  by  an  eminent 
New  England  divine  who  said  that,  with  his  sys- 
tem of  doctrine,  he  could  answer  every  question 
that  could  be  asked.  Compared  with  this,  the 
assumptions  of  the  Pope  of  Rome  are  modest  and 
moderate. 

The  other  reason  why  the  Church  holds  no  at- 
tainments in  theology  to  be  final  is  that  which 
Christ  has  given,  both  directly  and  through  the 
teaching  of  His  Apostles.  He  said  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  would  lead  the  Church  into  all  the 
truth  ;  that  there  was  to  be  a  growth  in  the 
knowledge  of  its  Lord  and  Saviour  in  the  entire 
body,  as  really  as  in  the  individual ;  and  He 
never  said  that  this  leading  should  at  any  time 


1 86  WHAT  IS    THEOLOGY? 

reach  its  completeness  and  there  stop.  The 
Romanist  and  the  sectarian  have  alike  a  belief 
that,  at  some  date,  that  guidance  ceased  upon 
this  or  that  line  because  a  goal  was  reached,  and 
so  they  think  that  the  formula  then  obtained 
may  and  must  be  accepted  as  a  final  crystalliza- 
tion of  a  truth.  But  the  Church  that  is  Apos- 
tolic, and,  thank  God  !  our  own,  believes  that  this 
leading  is  to  go  on  and  on,  with  ever  deepening 
vistas  into  "  the  mystery  of  godliness,"  ever 
greater  gains  in  purity  of  apprehension,  ever 
larger  perceptions  of  the  fullness  and  richness 
of  its  every  divine  fact,  whether  dogma  or  sac- 
rament or  ordinance  or  promise.  This  must  be 
so  in  the  nature  of  the  case. 

But  we  need  definite  doctrine.  This  is  the 
cry  of  many  unable  to  understand  the  position  of 
the  Catholic  Church,  or  to  appreciate  "the  lib- 
erty wherewith  Christ  has  made  us  free."  It 
has  always  been  the  wish  of  unthinking  men. 
The  simple  fact  is,  that  in  their  sense  they  can- 
not get  it,  and  our  spiritual  mother  declines  to 
give  it.  She  will  leave  room  in  her  fold  for  those 
who  are  to  come  after,  and  whom,  with  maturer 
thought,  the  definite  doctrines  of  to-day  would 
not  satisfy  about  such  things  as  God's  sover- 
eignty, or  man's  ability,  or  the  theory  of  atone- 
ment by  Christ,  or  the  working  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  He  is  hardly  kind  who  would  so  tie  her 
up  that  his  descendants  will  have  to  feed  on  his 
limited  conceptions,  or  tune  their  voices  to  his 


WHAT  IS    THEOLOGY?  I  8? 

shibboleths,  however  sweet  to  his  own  ear  they 
may  be.  And  if  he  want  this  definite  teaching, 
which  will  he  take  ?  Will  he  take  that  of  the 
Eastern  Church,  or  of  the  Western  ?  Will  he 
take  that  of  Italy  or  of  England  ?  Will  he  take 
that  of  Aquinas  or  of  Scotus  ?  Will  he  take  that 
of  Hooker,  or  of  Cosin  ?  Will  he  choose  to- 
day that  of  a  Pusey  or  of  a  Maurice  ?  A  recent 
dignitary,  referring  to  two  eminent  divines,  said 
that  he  daily  prayed  that  he  "might  live  like 
a  Taylor  and  die  like  a  Bull."  This  apparently 
grotesque  desire  meant  that  all  schools  may 
teach  us  something,  each  so-called  definite  doc- 
trine that  some  one  has  been  satisfied  with  may 
help  some  of  us  somewhere.  But  let  no  one 
dare  to  say  that  conclusions  which  he  has 
reached  are  definitive,  in  the  sense  of  being  bind- 
ing upon  other  disciples  of  Christ,  when  they 
utter  their  belief  in  Him  in  their  creed.  The 
Church  says  to  us,  "  Definite  teaching  is  found 
in  these  facts  upon  which  Christianity  stands. 
Rest  upon  them,  live  by  them,  preach  them. 
Beyond  them,  you  have  liberty  to  think  and  ad- 
vise and  suggest,  and  to  express  your  convic- 
tions. But  I  decline  to  warrant  your  committing 
me,  the  Church  that  embraces  all  kinds  of  minds 
and  must  have  room  for  all  the  ages,  to  any  of 
your  theological  conclusions  as  final.  Faultless 
conceptions  of  Christ  and  His  work  you  cannot 
have  and  never  will  have.  For,  to  finite  crea- 
tures, there  will  ever  remain  an  inexplorable  re- 


1 88  WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY? 

gion  on  the  other  side  of  every  fact,  and  al]  your 
imagined  definiteness  is,  at  the  best,  but  the  im- 
perfect result  of  scientific  effort.  I  have  enough 
to  answer  for  without  being  accountable  for,  and 
making  my  message  identical  with,  the  conclu- 
sions of  any  man  or  any  set  of  men  at  any  time." 
That  is,  the  Church  repudiates  the  idea  of  in- 
fallibility. There  is  a  frequent  confusion  of 
thought  about  this  term.  Infallibility,  as  Rome 
claims  it,  and  as  it  really  means,  is  inerrancy  or 
perfectness  in  doctrinal  definition.  Rome  as- 
serts this,  and  so  in  principle  does  every  body  of 
men  that  commits  itself  to  any  theological  sys- 
tem or  theory  of  the  Gospel  ;  for,  if  honest,  it 
must  believe  itself  right  and  others  wrong  in 
what  it  stands  for.  The  strength  of  this  posi- 
tion is  the  unwillingness  or  the  incapacity  of 
many  to  discriminate  between  facts  and  our  con- 
ception of  their  relations  ;  and  to  see  that,  while 
we  can  be  sure  of  the  former,  we  cannot  in  any 
way  be  sure  of  the  correctness  of  the  latter. 
Yet  this  is  the  attraction  of  Rome  to  many,  that 
to  those  who  regard  true  Christianity,  not  as  a 
life  of  trust,  but  as  assent  to  a  set  of  accurately 
stated  dogmatic  propositions,  that  system  says, 
"  Come  unto  me  and  I  will  give  you  rest,"  rest 
from  controversy  over  matters  of  belief.  Rome 
alone  makes  openly  such  an  absurd  and  vain  pre- 
tension, yet  every  sect  makes  it  by  implication. 
But  for  those  who  see  that  the  peace  of  the 
Christian  is  not  the  rest  of   final  settlement  of 


WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY?  1 89 

all  deep  questions,  but  confidence  in  Gospel 
facts,  this  invitation  has  no  relevancy.  It  is  seen 
to  be  an  offer  of  what  is  not  at  all  essential  to 
peace  of  mind,  and  of  what  is  only  given  in  coun- 
terfeit, never  in  reality.  For  infallibility  is  a 
dream  never  to  be  realized,  a  hallucination  if  be- 
lieved in.  It  is  impossible  to  the  Christian  who 
believes  in  the  leading  of  the  Spirit  as  a  contin- 
uous thing.  All  history  contradicts  it,  in  the 
cases  where  it  has  been  claimed.  Roman  so- 
called  infallible  utterances  have  been  changed 
and  corrected  ;  and  sects  that  began  to  be  be- 
cause of  some  tenet  of  which  their  founders 
were  so  sure  that  they  left  the  Church,  perhaps 
at  cost  of  heroic  sacrifices,  to  witness  to  it,  have 
come  to  give  up  their  very  raison  d'etre  by  ad- 
mitting that  those  founders  were,  after  all,  mis- 
taken. That  the  Church  will  not  actually  fall 
away  from  its  message  or  die  out,  we  must  be- 
lieve, since  Christ  has  promised  this  ;  but  that  it 
can  or  ever  will  infallibly  utter  the  fullness  of 
any  part  of  that  message,  there  is  no  reason  to 
expect,  no  reason  to  desire. 

And  now  we  see  the  value  of  the  theological 
work  of  the  past,  and  of  the  vast  literature  which 
it  has  given  us,  and  which  records  the  progress 
of  Christians  in  apprehending  the  Gospel  upon 
which  they  lean,  the  Christ  in  whom  they  trust. 
The  progress  has  not  been  so  slow,  nor  the  re- 
sults so  small,  as  some  perhaps  imagine.  The 
element  of  mystery  in  this  science  is  somewhat 


190  WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY? 

larger  than  in  some  others  ;  and  so  we  should 
expect  that,  apart  from  the  influence  of  feeling 
and  prejudice,  which  are  naturally  more  involved, 
it  should  advance  towards  its  goal  more  slowly 
than  they.  The  inorganic  sciences  have  ad- 
vanced with  very  halting  steps,  and  the  organic 
ones  even  more  slowly ;  and  their  schools  of 
thought  are  so  various  and  opposed  as  seriously 
to  confuse  us,  who  do  not  understand  their  re- 
condite discussions  much  better  than  they  seem 
to  understand  our  own.  But  there  has  been  that 
progress  in  theology  which  we  should  expect 
from  the  efforts  of  human  intelligence,  and  the 
guidance  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  Clearer  views  of 
the  divine  truth  have  been  gained,  and  the  limits 
of  our  capacity  more  clearly  perceived.  There 
has  been  advance  in  seeing  what  may  be  said, 
and  what  may  not,  about  the  Father,  the  Son, 
and  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  their  respective  oper- 
ations. Those  parts  of  Christendom  that  have 
been  capable  and  alive  have  made  advance  in 
proportion  to  their  conditions  ;  an  advance  felt 
in  the  life  and  thought  of  their  people,  shown  in 
the  utterances  of  the  clergy,  lending  color  to  lit- 
erature and  assistance  to  conduct.  Especially 
marked  has  this  advance  been  in  the  century 
now  drawing  to  its  close,  perhaps  more  than  in 
any  of  its  predecessors,  except  the  fourth.  The 
various  ancillary  sciences,  with  whose  aid  alone 
this  one  can  make  progress,  have  been  devel- 
oped to  a  marvelous    degree.     First  comes  the 


WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY?  191 

interpretation  of  the  Bible,  for  which  we  have 
unprecedented  assistance  in  improved  critical 
apparatus,  and  in  our  wider  acquaintance  with 
every  branch  of  knowledge  that  bears  upon  the 
elucidation  of  the  sacred  pages.  Then  there  is 
the  advance  made  in  historical  study,  in  psychol- 
ogy with  its  light  on  spiritual  facts,  even  in  phys- 
ics which  discloses  so  much  as  to  God's  methods 
in  creation  and  preservation.  These  are  all, 
with  many  others,  achievements  of  this  century, 
and  contribute  what  our  fathers  longed  for,  — in- 
dispensable assistance  to  the  queen  of  all  sci- 
ences ;  that  which  she  awaits,  and  which  they 
can  give.  The  consequence  is,  that  they  who  are 
willing  to  seek  it  will  find  an  advance  of  which 
others  little  know,  and  which  is  often  denied  by 
some  who  are  called  learned  in  theology,  and 
who  would  have  been  so  a  century  ago,  but  whose 
position  is  as  representative  of  this  noble  science 
to-day  as  would  be  that  of  a  contemporary  of  a 
Hutton  in  geology,  or  of  a  Kepler  in  astronomy, 
or  of  a  Galvani  in  physics.  Our  very  children 
now  learn,  as  commonplaces,  what  our  grand- 
fathers died  without  seeing,  and  reject  as  abhor- 
rent what  the  latter  fed  upon  as  precious.  We 
now  wonder  at  what  the  best  and  wisest  saw  no 
difficulty  in  holding ;  and,  in  our  devotions  and 
conduct,  we  are  guided  by  what  they  may  only 
have  dreamed  of  as  unpractical  vagaries.  Prob- 
lems in  thought  and  action,  in  the  world  of  sub- 
stance and  of  phenomena,  in  Church  and  State, 


1 9 2  WHA  T  IS    THEOLOG Vf 

in  polity  and  dogma,  once  perplexing,  are  now 
easily  solved  by  the  progress  made  in  theology. 
Many  of  the  implications  and  the  bearings  of  the 
Gospel  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  amplified 
in  the  facts  of  the  Apostolic  message,  are  ap- 
prehended now  as,  a  hundred  years  ago,  there 
seemed  little  hope  that  they  ever  could  be. 

That  is,  this  vast  literature,  which  is  so  often 
regarded  as  of  little  value,  has  the  same  value 
as  that  of  other  sciences.  True,  there  is  many 
a  musty  tome  that  records  forgotten  teachings, 
and  many  a  volume  now  unopened  that  contains 
the  results  of  years  of  labor.  Yet,  after  all,  those 
books  tell  the  progress  in  steps  of  earnest 
thought,  the  contribution  of  each  worker  to  the 
cause,  the  special  path  pursued  by  each  school  of 
toilers,  the  best  thought  of  each  time  up  to  the 
point  attained  in  our  own  day.  There  is  much 
that  has  been  left  behind  forever ;  yet  there  is 
much  that  can  never  be  outgrown,  much  that  is 
too  profound  or  too  holy  for  us  to  say  that  it  has 
nothing  for  us.  The  fathers  in  this  science,  like 
the  fathers  in  others,  —  the  Galileos,  the  Buffons, 
the  Newtons,  the  Lamarcks,  —  may  have  said 
many  things  that  are  antiquated,  but  they  had  a 
grasp  upon  principles  and  a  vision  of  vistas  that 
are  rarely  possessed  now.  And  so  we  are  all 
richer  for  this  theological  labor,  and  this  lore  of 
other  days.  All  share  in  its  results.  They  are  in 
the  air.  Churchman  and  Sectarian,  High  and  Low 
and  Broad  Schools  of  thought,  men  that  know 


WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY?  1 93 

nothing  about  the  matter  as  well  as  those  who 
know,  —  all  are  enlightened  and  better  for  this 
progress  in  theological  study.  This  growth  in 
the  knowledge  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus 
Christ  brings  blessing  to  all,  though  they  never 
read  its  volumes,  just  as  all  are  partakers  of  the 
benefits  of  many  another  line  of  human  inquiry, 
who  are  unacquainted  with  its  steps,  know  noth- 
ing of  its  struggles,  have  no  honor  for  its  heroes. 

But  we  must  not  overrate  these  results  of  the- 
ology, great  as  they  are.  We  must  remember 
how  much  more  is  undisclosed,  how  many  more 
questions  are  unanswered  still.  Upward  progress 
renders  the  horizon  ever  larger,  and  shows  us, 
not  less  but  more  of  the  wide,  wide  world  of  na- 
ture. It  is  so  with  the  wider  world  of  truth  and 
things  divine.  Each  new  elevation  we  attain,  as 
we  seek  to  scale  the  height  of  any  of  these  lofty 
verities  of  the  faith,  which,  like  majestic  peaks, 
soar  upwards  towards  the  heavens  and  are  bathed 
in  sunlight,  not  only  shows  us,  as  any  one  who 
tries  it  knows,  new  views  of  the  truth  possessed, 
but  also  new  demands  for  effort,  new  distances 
to  traverse  ere  the  top  be  reached,  —  that  sum- 
mit which  never  shall  be  gained,  since  to  all  eter- 
nity we  shall  be  approaching,  without  attaining, 
that  full  understanding  which  only  God  has  of 
what  He  has  told  us  in  His  Son.  For  that  sum- 
mit is  at  His  throne. 

So  theology  is  only  a  science,  but  a  very  holy 
and  a  very  precious  one,  and  one  to  which  the 


194  WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY* 

Church  and  the  world,  and  each  one  of  us,  owe 
more  than  is  often  realized,  because  of  what, 
under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  has 
drawn  from  the  Gospel  of  the  Son  of  God. 

Each  one  ought  to  some  extent  to  make  him- 
self familiar  with  it.  The  laity  are  not  required 
to  be  theologians  in  this  Church,  and  it  is  a 
blessed  thing  that  only  the  simple  Apostles' 
Creed  is  asked  from  their  lips  in  baptism.  That 
reproach  often  made  against  our  laity,  that  they 
know  so  little  of  doctrine,  is  not  so  much  to  their 
discredit  as  some  think.  We  are  very  glad  that 
they  are  not,  and  are  not  expected  to  be,  com- 
mitted to  any  transient  shibboleth  or  dominant 
idea,  nor  to  define  "  the  plan  of  salvation,"  as  it 
is  called,  in  all  details,  upon  the  basis  of  some 
assumption  to  which  all  the  rest  must  conform, 
and  by  which  every  nook  and  corner  of  truth  is 
thought  to  be  illumined.  Yet  it  is  true  that  the 
laity  can  and  should  make  themselves  better  ac- 
quainted with  theological  progress  than  they  gen- 
erally do.  If  the  matter  is  put  in  a  novel  it  is 
read,  and  a  great  deal  of  theology,  often  correct, 
yet  more  generally  extremely  crude  and  incorrect, 
is  absorbed  because  sugar-coated  with  fiction. 
But  there  are  plenty  of  volumes  which  are  within 
reac'h  of  those  who  are  not  experts,  which  will 
help  them,  teach  them  correctly,  enrich  their  reli- 
gious thinking,  and  show  them  a  wealth  of  acqui- 
sition and  a  reach  of  discovery  which  they  would 
deeply  enjoy. 


WHAT  IS   THEOLOGY?  1 95 

For,  with  all  that  may  be  said  as  to  differences 
of  opinion,  and  all  that  may  be  charged  as  to  the 
defect  of  fallibility,  yet,  when  we  consider  that 
the  loftier  the  field  of  study,  the  greater  is  the 
element  of  mystery ;  the  higher  the  phenomena, 
the  greater  the  liability  of  investigators  to  reach 
varying  conclusions,  —  we  can  affirm  that,  in  this 
age  of  the  sciences,  none  has  made  more  advance 
than  this  sovereign  of  them  all.  As  the  bright- 
est lives  of  history  are  found  in  the  calendar  of 
the  Church's  saints,  so  the  loftiest  intellects  are 
found  in  the  list  of  its  students,  and  the  richest 
contributions  to  the  world's  light  come  from 
their  consecrated  inquiry.  And  to-day,  little  as 
some  appear  to  be  aware  of  it,  the  keenest  inves- 
tigators, and  the  profoundest  seers  into  myste- 
rious things,  are  found  among  those  who  are  la- 
boring in  that  science  which  has  as  its  aim  the 
making  known  of  "the  unsearchable  riches  of 
Christ." 


LECTURE  VII. 

THE    BIBLE. 

u  They  received  the  word  with  all  readiness  of  mind,  and 
searched  the  Scriptures  daily,  whether  those  things  were  so."  — 
Acts  xvii.  ii. 

What  is  the  Bible,  and  what  is  its  place  in 
Christianity  ?  Some  may  wonder  why  this  in- 
quiry was  not  considered  first,  and  before  the 
other  questions,  but,  as  has  been  partly  seen,  and 
will  be  yet  more  fully  seen,  the  answer  to  it  de- 
pends upon  those  that  have  preceded  it.  It  is  in 
accordance  with  our  conceptions  regarding  them 
that  our  view  of  the  Sacred  Volume  will  be 
formed. 

By  the  first  question,  What  is  the  Bible  ?  is  not 
meant  merely  what  it  is  as  to  its  contents.  It  is 
a  volume  consisting  of  writings  by  men  taught  of 
Christ,  or  by  their  disciples,  and  embracing  biog- 
raphies of  Him,  a  history  of  the  foundation  of 
the  Church,  some  general  letters  and  some  other 
letters  to  individuals  and  local  churches,  and  a 
book  of  predictions  as  to  the  future  of  Christendom 
and  the  world.  There  is  also  added  to  that  collec- 
tion the  sacred  writings  of  Israel,  which  received 
the  indorsement  of  the  Lord  and  His  Apostles  as 


THE  BIBLE  1 97 

fit  to  be  included  in  a  book  for  the  Church's  use. 
Concerning  the  history  of  the  formation  of  this 
volume  it  is  not  necessary  to  speak  ;  nor  are  we 
called  upon  to  go  into  discussions  which,  how- 
ever pressing  and  important,  yet  do  not  involve 
what  we  are  now  to  notice,  and  do  not  affect 
what  this  lecture  will  endeavor  to  set  forth. 

The  question,  What  is  the  Bible  ?  means,  What 
estimate  are  we  to  make  of  it  ?  where  are  we  to 
place  it  among  the  books  of  the  world  ?  what 
deference  are  we  to  give  it  ?  We  shall  be  guided 
in  our  reply  by  considering  certain  features  that 
stand  out  as  we  look  at  it. 

At  the  outset,  we  notice  its  unity.  In  reality 
it  is  a  library,  a  collection  of  writings  made  dur- 
ing an  interval  of  nearly  fifteen  hundred  years 
by  about  seventy  authors  in  different  lands,  and 
who,  in  many  cases,  never  saw  one  another. 
Further,  these  men  never  knew  that  their  writ- 
ings were  to  be  collected  in  a  volume.  Yet 
really  it  is  one  book.  Although  so  diverse  in 
origin,  it  is  so  much  a  unit  that  many  readers  do 
not  seem  to  know  it  is  not  the  work  of  one  man  ; 
and  most  readers  peruse  it  without  thinking  of 
its  varied  authorship,  if  aware  of  it.  For  all  dif- 
ferences are  lost  in  the  sense  of  the  prevailing 
unity  that  is  felt  as  one  reads  it.  It  is  a  unit  in 
its  theme  :  the  redemption  of  man,  and  prepara- 
tion for  that  result.  It  is  a  unit  in  its  temper 
and  tone  :  a  holy  book.  It  is  a  unit  in  its  teach- 
ing :  it  does  not  contradict  itself.     It  is  a  unit  in 


198  THE  BIBLE. 

its  progress  :  does  not  speak  a  different  utter- 
ance as  years  go  by,  nor  revert  to  stages  that  had 
been  passed. 

Now,  this  unity  of  so  many  writings  by  so 
many  men,  during  so  many  years,  would  seem  to 
indicate  a  superintending  mind.  When  we  see  a 
number  of  blocks  of  stone,  upon  being  brought 
together,  combine  into  a  symmetrical  edifice,  we 
conclude  as  evident  that  some  one  directed  their 
preparation  who  had  the  structure  in  view.  So 
this  harmonious  book,  resulting  from  the  combi- 
nation of  so  many  factors,  indicates  the  superin- 
tendence of  an  intelligence  that  guided  all  the 
work  towards  that  intended  goal.  This  can  have 
been  no  human  mind.  A  superintendence  over 
so  wide  a  field  can  only  mean  the  Providence  of 
God.  Thus  has  the  fact  that  the  labors  of  so 
many  men  result  in  a  handbook  for  God's  people, 
which  is  so  consistent,  symmetrical,  and  adapted 
to  the  end  for  which  the  ages  since  have  used  it, 
always  indicated  to  reasonable  men  the  presence 
of  a  divine  element  in  its  canon,  made  them  feel 
that  the  collection  has  been  more  than  the  re- 
sult of  merely  human  selection  and  preservation. 
Define  it  as  you  please,  there  is  nowhere  else 
any  greater  instance  of  the  working  of  Provi- 
dence than  in  the  history  of  the  Bible. 

But  this  is  not  all.  There  are  some  other  facts 
that  must  be  taken  into  the  account,  in  forming 
an  estimate  of  this  strange  book,  bearing  upon 
other  questions  than  its  origin  as  a  collection. 


THE  BIBLE.  1 99 

Consider  its  exhaustlessness.  No  other  book 
has  been  so  much  studied.  The  treatises  and 
commentaries  devoted  to  it  exceed  enumeration. 
Biblical  literature  is  equal  in  quantity  to  that  of 
any  other  department,  perhaps  greater  than  any. 
That  study  has  been  varied.  It  has  been  devo- 
tional, to  stimulate  piety  ;  practical,  to  guide  con- 
duct ;  and  doctrinal,  to  develop  theology.  It  has 
been  prosecuted  by  all  kinds  of  minds , —  by  the 
most  acute  as  well  as  by  the  most  commonplace. 
Men  in  the  front  rank  of  intellectual  power  have 
gone  to  it  for  ages,  as  to  a  mine  for  explora- 
tion ;  preachers,  as  to  a  spring  for  themes  and 
thoughts ;  poets,  as  to  a  garden  for  flowers  of 
imagery  and  illustration.  Yet  it  has  not  been 
exhausted,  and  shows  no  sign  of  exhaustion.  It 
is  studied  to-day  as  much  as  ever,  more  critically 
than  ever  before,  yet  it  yields  as  much  as  ever 
that  is  fresh  and  precious.  Instead  of  having 
been  outgrown  by  human  progress,  on  the  con- 
trary all  that  progress  only  ministers  to  its  study. 
Other  books  are  one  by  one  laid  away  upon  the 
shelf,  superseded  in  the  flight  of  time,  however 
valuable  they  may  once  have  been ;  but  this  one 
lives  on  in  perennial  value.  It  sees  ambitious 
literature  pass  into  forgetfulness,  just  as  the 
Church  sees  empires  rise  and  pass  away  that  had 
threatened  its  supremacy. 

Again,  consider  the  effects  of  this  volume  on 
life  and  conduct,  —  a  subject  needing  the  history 
of  Christendom  and  the  history  of  civilization  to 


200  THE  BIBLE. 

cover  its  ground.  Its  perusal  has  been  the  cause 
of  revolutions  in  countless  characters  ;  its  distri- 
bution, the  source  of  the  strength  of  the  strong- 
est nations  ;  its  reopening,  the  awakening  of  peo- 
ples from  the  sleep  of  ages.  This  can  be  said 
of  no  other  volume.  In  counting  up  the  factors 
that  have  contributed  to  make  the  world  what  it 
is  to-day,  in  enumerating  the  forces  potent  for 
good  in  this  land,  the  powers  that  have  shaped 
our  lives,  our  homes,  our  surroundings,  this  is 
one  of  the  few  controlling  elements,  and  the  only 
book  that  is  to  be  included  in  such  a  list. 

Consider  its  effects  upon  literature.  This  is 
especially  noticeable  in  our  own,  while  it  is  also 
great  in  that  of  other  lands  and  tongues.  One 
can  hardly  open  a  page  of  prose  or  poetry,  of  fic- 
tion, of  history,  or  of  philosophy,  without  finding 
what  would  not  have  been  there  had  there  been 
no  Bible.  This  is  true  of  writings  by  men  who 
do  not  esteem  it  as  we  do.  It  is  so  ingrained 
in  our  thought  that  it  is  a  question  whether  it 
would  be  possible  to  write  a  volume  on  any  sub- 
ject that  should  owe  nothing  to  the  Scriptures. 
It  would,  at  any  rate,  be  extremely  dull  or  im- 
poverished in  style.  Skeptics  and  infidels  do  not 
seem  able  to  escape  incurring  indebtedness  to  it. 
They  have  to  use  its  metaphors,  refer  to  its  con- 
tents, recognize  its  prestige.  Its  version  is  the 
English  classic,  and  occupies  a  place  in  our  liter- 
ature that  no  other  book  occupies  in  any  other 
language.     But,  apart  from  this  matter  of  style, 


THE  BIBLE.  201 

take  out  of  the  pages  of  Shakespeare,  or  Tenny- 
son, or  Browning,  or  out  of  Gibbon  or  Macaulay, 
yes,  out  of  those  of  an  unbeliever  like  Shelley, 
or  a  creature  of  self-indulgence  like  Byron,  all 
that  they  owe  to  the  Bible,  and  the  result  would 
be  pages  white  with  hiatuses,  and  as  void  of  se- 
quence as  of  illustration.  And  as  to  Milton, 
what  would  be  left  of  him  ?  Yes,  take  him  who 
stands  at  the  head  of  human  literature,  the  peer- 
less Dante,  and  see  there  how  even  the  supreme 
poet,  because  the  loftiest  prophet,  was  what  he 
was,  wrote  what  he  wrote,  because  of  the  influ- 
ence of  this  wonderful  book. 

Consider  its  superiority  in  dignity  to  other 
books.  They  all  seem  commonplace  and  earthly 
in  comparison.  They  may  be  more  exciting, 
more  interesting  even,  yet  no  one  would  say 
they  are  so  lofty.  They  may  be  beyond  our  imi- 
tation, yet  not  inconceivably  so.  That  is,  we 
can  imagine  men  able  to  write  the  Ethics  of 
Aristotle  or  a  play  of  Shakespeare,  without  ab- 
surdity, but  no  sensible  man  will  claim  that  he, 
or  any  one  else,  could  ever  write  the  Book  of 
Isaiah,  or  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  It  is  not 
what  we  expect  of  any  genius  or  any  learning. 
We  regard  it  as  no  reproach  to  compare  any 
other  work  with  it  unfavorably,  since  it  is  known 
to  be,  of  course,  inimitable. 

Notice  its  superiority  to  its  own  contempo- 
rary literature.  We  have  plenty  of  writings  of 
the  days  of  the  New  Testament,  and  are  finding 


202  THE   BIBLE. 

more  and  more  belonging  to  the  period  covered 
by  the  Old.  Yet  none  of  them  approach  the 
Sacred  Scriptures.  The  Greek  and  Latin  clas- 
sics, with  all  their  wealth,  have  nothing  to  lay 
hold  of  the  heart  as  do  these  books  by  lowly 
Jews ;  and  as  to  the  others,  compared  with  the 
Old  Testament,  all  ancient  volumes  of  India  or 
Chaldea  are  "  flat,  stale,  and  unprofitable."  As 
Max  Muller  said,  when  criticised  for  publishing 
versions  of  the  Sacred  Books  of  the  East,  Chris- 
tians should  court  the  comparison,  for  it  shows 
how  inferior  these  are  to  the  Sacred  Books  of 
Israel. 

But  it  is  chiefly  with  regard  to  the  moral  and 
religious  element  that  these  books  show  their  su- 
periority to  old  literature.  This  is  the  supreme 
test  of  a  book,  that  which  must  fix  its  rank,  the 
measure  of  the  value  of  any  volume.  And  here 
the  Bible  shows  an  unapproachable  elevation. 
Now  these  writers,  though  living  in  different 
epochs  and  in  varied  lands,  were  yet  always  sur- 
rounded by  crude  and  low  ideas  of  God.  Their 
contemporaries  are  full  of  statements  and  ideas 
that  we  spurn,  and  of  ethics  that  are  intolerable  ; 
they  have  no  reproof  for  hideous  vices,  and  teach 
unworthy  views  of  life.  But  out  of  such  times 
and  such  surroundings  this  Bible  emerges  clear 
as  the  sunlight,  pure  as  the  snow.  This  is  es- 
pecially marked  where  it  treats  the  same  themes 
as  other  writings.  Take,  for  instance,  the  story 
of  creation  and  of  the  early  days  of  the  world. 


THE  BIBLE.  203 

On  Chaldean  monuments  and  tablets  that  story 
is  all  found,  but  there  it  is  mixed  with  polythe- 
ism and  puerilities  and  worthless  rubbish.  Here, 
however,  as  in  all  the  rest  of  its  pages,  the  stand- 
ard of  the  Bible  can  endure  the  tests  of  our 
mental  and  moral  progress.  Its  ethics  conform 
to  the  taste  of  these  latest  times,  for  it  is  read 
as  helpful  unto  true  godliness  by  the  holiest  in 
their  holiest  hours,  in  this  evening  of  the  nine- 
teenth century. 

For  consider,  lastly,  how  it  has  been  loved. 
To  say  that  it  has  been  supremely  treasured,  and 
copies  of  it  valued  as  relics ;  that  it  has  been  the 
only  volume  prized  by  the  sick  and  the  suffer- 
ing, the  only  one  cherished  in  the  most  sacred 
moments  of  life,  — is  all  too  trite  to  dwell  upon. 
The  earnest  opponents  of  the  faith  have  done 
their  best  to  shake  its  hold  upon  human  affec- 
tion, have  used  many  a  plausible  argument,  many 
a  keen  weapon,  but  they  have  not  succeeded. 
Never  were  so  many  Bibles  sold  as  to-day,  never 
so  many  distributed.  If  we  were  to  poll  the  list 
of  the  holy  and  intelligent  people  of  any  commu- 
nity, who  doubts  that  this  would  be  found  to  be, 
of  all  the  volumes  in  the  world,  the  most  valued  ? 
Other  books  are  read  with  intense  interest,  but 
we  cannot  say  that  men  love  them.  Others  may 
be  regarded  by  some  as  more  important,  yet 
none  has  such  a  hold  upon  the  hearts  of  those  we 
most  revere.  There  is  no  other  book  for  which 
men   will   die,  without    which  life  would  be  so 


204  THE  BIBLE. 

dark ;  none  else  that  could  not  be  replaced  if 
the  world's  libraries  were  burned  by  some  new 
Omar. 

Now,  how  are  we  to  account  for  a  volume  not 
only  so  strange  a  unit,  but  so  exhaustless  to 
study,  so  wide  in  its  influence,  so  superior  to 
others,  and  so  beloved  ?  This  question  cannot 
be  put  aside.  This  book  is  unique.  There  is  no 
other  that  can  be  put  on  the  same  shelf.  Great 
and  vast  as  is  the  literature  of  this  world,  the 
books  of  the  Bible  form  a  class  separate  from  it 
all,  because  superior  in  value  to  mankind.  There 
must  be  some  adequate  explanation  of  such  a 
fact.     What  is  it  ? 

The  only  reasonable  one  is  that  which  has 
ever  been  given  by  the  best  thought  of  the  most 
advanced  lands,  and  by  the  Church,  which  repre- 
sents the  efflorescence  of  human  opinion,  —  is 
that  God  gave  it  to  the  world.  It  is  manifestly 
His  book ;  as  clearly  His  bestowal  as  creation  or 
redemption  are  His  work.  It  cannot  be  man's 
gift,  for  it  is  beyond  his  capacity,  because  it  does 
for  God's  people  what  only  God  can  do,  — brings 
a  message  that  bears  the  divine  stamp,  shows  the 
divine  mind.  But  this  is  not  only  true  regard- 
ing its  compilation,  of  which  we  have  spoken  ;  it 
is  true  of  its  contents  and  matter,  so  exhaustless 
and  so  exalted.  That  is,  a  divine  element  in  the 
component  parts  can  alone  account  for  these  pe- 
culiarities that  have  been  noticed  ;  and  that  ele- 
ment is  Inspiration. 


THE  BIBLE.  205 

At  once  this  word  awakens  opposition,  and 
perhaps  ridicule.  Many  say  that  it  is  only  an 
antiquated  notion  of  credulous  folk.  But  it  is 
pretty  safe  to  say,  as  observation  shows,  that 
they  who  speak  thus  either  do  not  know  what 
inspiration  means,  or  else  are  not  sufficiently 
familiar  with  the  Book  to  pass  any  opinion  upon 
its  peculiarities. 

By  "  inspiration  "  we  mean  that  influence  of  the 
Spirit  of  God  which  gives  discernment  in  spir- 
itual things,  whether  moral  or  religious.  Surely 
this  is  the  mark  of  the  Bible,  for  this  has  made 
it  precious.  Its  value  has  not  lain  in  its  historic 
lore,  nor  in  its  poetic  beauty,  nor  in  its  literary 
isolation  ;  but  in  the  light  that  comes  from 'it  for 
the  dark  hours  of  life,  the  deep  hours  of  thought, 
and  the  soaring  hours  of  holy  meditation.  It  is 
"The  Book,"  — which  is  its  name  translated  into 
English, — just  because  it  is  alone  authoritative 
on  supreme  things.  It  is  solitary  as  the  volume 
of  religious  and  ethical  teaching.  But  whence  can 
such  illumination  come,  if  not  from  the  "  Father 
of  lights  "  ?  Some  would  tell  us  that  its  inspira- 
tion is  the  same  as  that  of  poets  and  painters, 
who  have  been  given  that  attribute  in  common 
parlance  ;  that  its  superiority  is  the  result  of 
genius.  But  there  is  no  evidence  that  these 
writers  were  all  geniuses,  or  that  any  were  such 
extraordinary  men  as  to  be  capable  in  themselves 
of  giving  such  light  to  the  world.  Moreover, 
this  afflatus  is  not  that  which  results  in  aesthetic 


206  THE  BIBLE. 

or  in  imaginative  excellence  ;  it  is  of  a  kind  that 
genius  does  not  possess  ;  it  is  a  spiritual  inspi- 
ration. The  Bible  speaks  to  men  of  loftier 
things  than  art.  Its  power,  its  excellence,  per- 
tain to  a  different  sphere.  It  speaks  to  the 
heart,  of  God  and  holiness,  of  right  and  truth,  of 
eternity  and  of  the  way  to  gain  it.  Men  prize  it 
beyond  all  other  books  because  in  it  they  hear,  as 
in  no  others,  the  voice  of  God,  —  find  in  it  what 
they  seek  from  Him,  and  what  can  only  come 
from  Him.  But,  some  will  retort,  Wherein  then 
is  this  different  from  the  inspiration  of  saintly 
preachers,  or  of  such  books  as  the  Pilgrim's 
Progress,  or  the  Imitation  of  Christ  ?  They  are 
indeed  akin,  we  admit,  for  they  all  show  the 
divine  afflatus.  But  the  difference  is,  that  the 
latter  owe  to  the  Bible  all  the  value  they  possess, 
gain  thence  their  inspiration.  It  stands  to  them 
as  the  spring  to  the  water,  as  the  original  to  the 
copy,  at  the  best.  Other  men  might  write,  like 
an  a.  Kempis  or  a  Bunyan,  by  drawing  upon  the 
same  source,  but  not  like  a  John.  We  quote  the 
pages  of  the  latter  as  finally  authoritative,  as 
well  as  supremely  precious.  But  no  one  would 
probably  so  quote  the  former,  which  at  once 
shows  that  in  their  cases  inspiration  means  a 
different  thing  in  kind  as  well  as  degree. 

So  we  see  that  there  are  three  possible  views 
of  this  marvelous  volume.  One  is,  that  it  is 
only  human,  the  pious  work  of  gifted  men.  We 
reply  to  this  that,  if  it  could  account  for  the  ele- 


THE  BIBLE.  2C>7 

vation  of  the  Bible,  it  could  not  explain  its  unity  ; 
and  as  to  its  elevation,  if  one  see  no  more  than 
human  illumination,  no  more  than  what  is  feas- 
ible to  men,  by  comparison  with  what  men  have 
otherwise  done,  if  one  see  not  that  the  Bible 
occupies  a  solitary  position  over  against  the 
other  books  in  the  world,  —  it  is  a  matter  of  judg- 
ment, about  which,  like  one  of  taste,  we  cannot 
argue.  It  is  like  saying  that  one  sees  no  more 
than  humanity  in  Christ,  or  human  wisdom  in 
history ;  things  which  cannot  be  demonstrated, 
any  more  than  one  can  demonstrate  the  excel- 
lence of  a  picture,  or  the  beauty  of  a  flower. 
Such  a  man  lacks  the  development  of  his  reli- 
gious perceptions,  and  that  is  all  we  can  say.  As 
was  remarked,  this  denial  of  any  divine  element 
is  usually  due  to  a  misapprehension  of  what  it 
means,  —  a  reaction  from  the  exaggerated  state- 
ment of  it,  to  which  we  now  turn. 

The  usual  position  regarding  the  Bible,  the 
principal  error  to  be  met,  has  been  the  other 
extreme,  or  holding  its  inspiration  to  such  a  de- 
gree that  the  human  element  has  been  entirely 
denied.  The  chief  danger  to  its  real  value  has 
been  making  it  only  a  divine  dictation,  where  the 
penmen  had  no  part  beyond  the  writing  of  the 
words.  This  is  the  same  heresy  as  Docetism 
regarding  Christ,  for  it  is  affirming  that  the  hu- 
manity in  the  written  word  is  only  a  semblance. 
It  shows,  in  the  one  case  as  in  the  other,  how 
intensely  patent  the  divinity  is  when  it  has  been 
so  difficult  to  keep  its  affirmation  within  bounds. 


208  THE   BIBLE. 

But  this  theory  is  as  much  contradicted  by 
facts  in  Inspiration  as  in  Incarnation.  The  hu- 
man element  in  the  Scriptures  is  as  real  as  that 
in  the  life  of  Jesus ;  and  it  is  as  absurd  to 
thought,  and  as  dangerous  to  religion,  to  deny  it 
in  one  case  as  in  the  other.  It  is  seen  every- 
where,—  in  the  differences  between  the  writers 
and  between  their  productions  ;  in  the  expres- 
sions that  mark  the  working  of  real  minds,  the 
actual  thinking  of  living  men.  It  may  seem  su- 
perfluous to  speak  of  a  matter  so  obvious,  yet 
every  day  we  see  that  it  is  necessary.  This  ex- 
treme position  has  alienated,  and  is  alienating, 
many  from  the  Bible  itself,  who  think  that  to 
accept  this  book  requires  the  acceptance  of  so 
indefensible  a  view  of  it.  Yet  even  this  error 
has  a  singular  strength  for  men.  Many  lives  and 
careers,  saturated  with  the  idea,  have  had  a  mar- 
velous force  because  of  it.  This  is  seen  in  the 
case  of  General  Gordon,  whose  letters  show  what 
a  mighty  power  it  was  in  his  heroic  life.  How 
true  that  inspiration  must  be  which,  in  an  inde- 
fensible form,  yet  makes  men  as  holy  and  fearless 
as  he  !     How  shallow  they  must  be  who  deny  it ! 

A  sensible  and  a  sound  view  of  all  the  facts, 
then,  leads  us  to  see  in  this  book  both  a  human 
and  a  divine  element ;  therefore  our  effort  must 
be  to  seek  some  formula  of  their  relation.  It  is 
easy  here,  as  elsewhere,  to  solve  the  problem  by 
eliminating  either  factor,  but  a  wise  man  would 
rather  leave  it  unsolved  than  gain  such  an  un- 


THE  BIBLE.  209 

candid  solution  ;  and  unsolved  it  must  ever  re- 
main, just  as  the  problem  of  the  union  of  the 
human  and  divine  in  history  or  in  life,  or  in  the 
person  of  the  Redeemer. 

And  herein  is  this  Church  of  ours  found  to  be 
wise.  It  has  never  given  any  definition  of  In- 
spiration, allows  no  one  to  commit  it  to  any.  In 
the  Prayer  Book  and  Ordination  Services,  as  in 
the  Articles,  the  Sacred  Volume  is  said  to  be  a 
standard,  an  ultimate  rule  of  faith  and  practice  ; 
which  is  giving  to  it  an  authority  that  cannot  be 
given  to  human  utterances.  But  the  word  "in- 
spiration" is  not  mentioned;  the  whole  subject 
as  to  how  the  Volume  has  come  to  possess  such 
an  authority  is  studiously  avoided.  God  is  said 
to  speak  in  it,  but  it  is  not  said  how  that  is  true. 
The  Church  is  too  prudent  to  use  any  term  or 
state  any  theory  which  is  sure  to  be  outgrown, 
and  to  be  forever  insufficient.  When  one  can 
tell  me  how  the  divine  and  human  were  related 
in  Christ  ;  how  God  sanctifies  a  mind ;  how  God 
guides  the  lives  of  men  ;  yes,  how  God  sustains 
the  world  :  —  when  he  tells  me  the  formula  of 
any  connection  between  God  and  the  creature,  I 
will  tell  him  the  formula  of  an  inspiration  that  is 
just  as  patent  as  these  other  facts. 

This  much,  however,  we  must  abide  by  :  the 
inspiration  was  of  the  men,  not  of  the  books. 
What  we  see  is,  not  the  light  from  the  pages,  but 
that  from  the  writers  who  wrote  them.  They 
were  illumined  in  such  measure  as  each  needed 


210  THE  BIBLE. 

for  his  task,  whether  to  avoid  saying  the  unfit,  or 
to  say  that  which  was  needed.  Call  it  the  inspi- 
ration of  a  people  or  of  a  Church,  which  is  behind 
the  books,  yet  it  is  the  same  thing.  If  it  be  the 
result  of  the  inspiration  of  Israel,  or  of  the  Chris- 
tian brotherhood,  yet  that  inspiration  culminated, 
as  nowhere  else,  in  these  writers  of  the  Bible. 

Again,  this  was  real  inspiration,  not  physical 
compulsion  or  dictation.  It  was  the  free  and 
real  work  of  thinking  men,  but  of  men  whose 
minds  had  an  illumination  we  do  not  find  in  oth- 
ers, a  gift  so  to  perceive  spiritual  things  as  to 
render  them  our  guides  and  authorities.  It  is 
that  which  no  education,  no  talents  can  confer, 
which  makes  us  ready  to  learn  of  them  what  we 
cannot  learn  of  others,  willing  to  sit  at  their 
feet  when  we  would  be  taught  of  God.  It  is 
that  which  makes  men  who  will  call  no  man  mas- 
ter, their  disciples. 

Such,  then,  being  the  Bible,  a  divinely  given 
and  divinely  inspired  Volume,  what  is  its  place  in 
Christendom,  its  relation  to  the  Church  ?  This 
is  a  very  different  question  from  the  one  just 
considered.  The  statement  of  its  divine  charac- 
ter does  not  settle  its  use.  It  is  also  a  very  im- 
portant question  ;  for  some  answers  to  it  have 
been  the  source  of  much  error  and  confusion, 
and,  as  we  shall  see,  have  led  to  complications 
that  rendered  difficult  the  vindication  of  essential 
Christianity.  It  has  been  touched  upon  before 
this,  and  the  correct  reply  indicated.     But  let  us 


THE   BIBLE.  211 

now  address  ourselves  to  it  directly,  that  the  issue 
may  be  clear.  We  do  not  refer  to  the  devotional 
use  of  the  Scriptures.  About  this  there  is  no 
dispute,  as  to  its  being  a  means  of  grace,  a  help 
in  the  spiritual  life.  It  is  rather  their  use  in 
matters  of  belief  and  practice  that  we  would  con- 
sider, about  which  there  is  great  dispute,  and  a 
common  view  of  which  is,  as  we  shall  see,  en- 
tirely wrong  and  utterly  impracticable. 

The  position  that  is  true  and  consistent  with 
the  idea  of  Christianity  may  be  shown  by  an  ex- 
perience which  set  it  forth  in  a  way  that  was 
new  and  effective. 

It  was  once  my  lot  to  be  storm-stayed  for  a 
week  in  Syracuse,  waiting  for  the  turbulent 
Mediterranean  to  calm  itself  sufficiently  for  us  to 
pass  to  Tunis.  There  was  plenty  to  occupy  us 
during  the  day  in  such  a  place,  where  we  could 
visit  the  deep  quarries  in  which  seven  thousand 
Athenian  captives  were  starved  to  death,  as  re- 
lated by  Thucydides  ;  the  fountain  of  Cyane, 
where  Orpheus  found  entrance  to  the  lower 
world  in  search  of  Proserpine ;  the  beautiful  blue 
Anapo,  fringed  with  nodding  papyrus  ;  and  other 
places  interesting  to  the  classical  student. 

But  the  evenings  offered  no  such  diversions, 
and  so  my  companion  and  I  passed  them  at  the 
cafe  or  club,  where  the  officers  of  the  garrison, 
the  professors  in  the  university,  and  whatever 
there  was  of  aristocracy  in  that  dead  city,  were 
wont  to  gather,  and  where  we  met  that  courtesy 


212  THE   BIBLE. 

in  which  Italians  excel.  On  the  second  evening, 
while  we  were  enjoying  the  bright  scene  and 
watching  the  games  and  conversations  in  pro- 
gress, a  gentleman  approached  to  invite  us  to 
join  one  of  the  circles,  supposing  us  to  be  Eng- 
lish tourists.  Upon  learning  that  we  were 
Americans,  he  became  interested,  for  he  had 
never  before  met  those  from  beyond  the  sea. 
We  spoke  of  the  themes  in  which  intelligent  Ital- 
ians are  so  much  concerned,  liberal  institutions, 
and  educational  and  material  advance.  It  be- 
came necessary  for  me  to  let  him  know  that  I 
was  a  clergyman  of  the  Anglican  communion  in 
America  ;  and  immediately  he  launched  out  into 
inquiries  regarding  religion,  the  great  topic  of 
the  thoughtful  among  his  peophs,  who  believe  in 
an  historic  Church  and  ancient  institutions,  yet 
wish  them  free  from  abuses  and  corruptions. 
He  displayed  an  unusually  clear  apprehension  of 
the  great  truths  of  Christianity,  such  as  the 
Trinity,  the  Incarnation,  the  example  of  Christ, 
and  others  still,  which  he  understood  better  than 
the  average  layman  whom  we  meet  in  our  own 
land,  together  with  a  perception  of  the  truth  of 
criticisms  upon  the  Romish  system  that  he  had 
met  in  books  and  periodicals.  He  pushed  in- 
quiry after  inquiry  with  such  a  comprehensive 
knowledge  of  Christianity  that  I  remarked  that 
he  was  unusually  familiar  with  the  Bible  and  its 
contents.  With  a  tone  of  sadness,  he  replied, 
"I  have  never   seen  a  Bible,     They  were  not 


THE  BIBLE.  213 

permitted  in  Sicily  until  our  revolution,  and  since 
then  we  have  been  able  to  purchase  them  no 
nearer  than  at  Naples."  I  took  from  my  pocket 
an  Italian  Testament,  which  I  carried  for  philo- 
logical as  well  as  religious  purposes,  after  the  ex- 
ample of  Kossuth,  who  testified  that  it  was  the 
best  book  to  learn  any  language  from,  and  said  it 
was  a  pleasure  to  show  it  to  him.  He  handled  it 
with  reverent  interest,  looked  at  its  pages,  and 
gave  it  back.  Upon  being  told  that  he  must 
keep  it  as  a  souvenir  of  our  meeting,  he  ardently 
asked  whether  I  really  meant  it,  and,  upon  being 
assured  thereof,  embraced  me  with  characteris- 
tic effusiveness.  Then  he  arose  and  went  from 
group  to  group,  arresting  games  and  conversa- 
tions, to  say  :  "  See  this  Testament !  An  Amer- 
ican priest  has  given  it  to  me !  "  It  was  a  scene 
to  be  remembered,  to  see  those  moustachioed 
and  uniformed  men  passing  the  little  volume 
from  hand  to  hand,  as  if  it  were  some  gem,  look- 
ing at  it  as  if  the  sight  were  an  epoch  in  their 
lives,  and  then  thanking  me  for  so  great  a  priv- 
ilege. We  resumed  our  conversation,  and  my 
friend,  a  nobleman,  mentioned  many  things  con- 
cerning which  he  had  long  wished  light  from  the 
Sacred  Volume ;  asking  me  to  show  him  what  it 
had  to  say  upon  such  matters  as  the  position  of 
the  ministry,  the  character  of  confession,  the 
truth  about  the  Lord's  Supper,  the  nature  of  the 
family,  and  so  forth.  This  discussion  lasted  sev- 
eral evenings,  and   the  assembly  resolved  itself 


214  THE  BIBLE. 

into  a  sort  of  Bible  class,  a  new  thing  in  a  very 
old  town.  For  instance,  while  speaking  on  one 
occasion  of  the  question  of  the  celibacy  of  the 
clergy,  to  which  he  rightly  attributed  many  of 
the  evils  of  the  Church's  condition,  I  asked  why 
they  who  felt  as  he  did,  did  not  use  in  this  con- 
troversy the  argument  from  the  marriage  of  St. 
Peter.  "  Peter  married  !  "  he  exclaimed,  "  where 
did  you  get  such  an  idea  ? "  It  was  easy  to 
show  him  where  that  Apostle's  mother-in-law's 
illness  was  spoken  of,  and  her  healing  narrated  ; 
and  he  then  eagerly  imparted  to  all  in  the  room 
the  astounding  piece  of  information  that  the 
Pope's  alleged  predecessor  was  not  a  celibate. 
This  was  news  to  them.  They  would  not  be- 
lieve it  until  each  had  read  it  for  himself,  and 
they  went  home  that  night  with  a  new  and  gen- 
erative idea  in  their  heads. 

And  so  our  evenings  passed  in  this  strange 
Bible  study,  until  the  ship  could  sail  that  bore 
me  away  from  where,  there  is  reason  to  be- 
lieve, some  seed  had  fallen  into  ground  that  wel- 
comed it. 

This  incident,  by  a  concrete  illustration,  casts 
light  upon  our  inquiry  as  to  the  place  of  the 
Bible  in  the  Church. 

It  shows,  in  the  first  place,  that  it  is  not  the 
transmitter  of  the  Gospel  through  the  ages. 
This  is  the  popular  idea :  that  it  is  the  one 
means,  divinely  appointed  thereto,  of  perpetuat- 
ing the  facts  which  Christ  chose  His  Apostles 
to  proclaim  for  human  salvation. 


THE   BIBLE.  21  5 

But  this  man  had  received  Christianity  with- 
out it,  and  a  very  complete  and  helpful  Christian- 
ity. .  He  was  as  well  informed,  concerning  what 
really  gives  it  its  value,  as  persons  whom  we 
meet  in  our  more  favored  land.  And  does  he 
not  represent  the  great  majority  of  Christians  ? 
How  many  have  lived  and  died  without  possess- 
ing the  Sacred  Volume,  or  who  perhaps  could 
not  read  it  if  they  had  it  !  But  not  only  is  this 
true  of  past  centuries  when  it  was  more  or  less 
inaccessible  :  many  live  by  the  Gospel  now  who 
do  not  receive  it  from  that  source.  As  a  rule, 
people  do  not  become  Christians  because  the 
Bible  persuades  them,  but  only  study  its  pages 
after  they  have  believed.  The  Bible  itself  prob- 
ably makes  few  believers.  Its  preciousness  is 
seen  when  faith  has  preceded  it. 

How,  then,  is  the  Gospel  transmitted  ?  How 
do  the  succeeding  generations  receive  their  Chris- 
tianity ?  Just  as  that  Italian  had  received  his,  — 
through  the  Church ;  by  the  creeds,  the  services, 
the  sacraments,  the  feasts  and  fasts,  the  holy 
days,  of  that  Church ;  through  the  Christian 
family;  through  *  literature  ;  through  tradition; 
through  that  whole  stream  of  life  and  thought 
which  are  found  in  Christendom,  maintained  by 
its  activities,  and  from  which  our  life  cannot  be 
separated.  The  Church,  that  body  of  baptized 
people  of  which  the  historical  organization  is  the 
background  even  where  ignored,  the  permanent 
and  sustaining  factor,  however  rejected,  —  this  is 


2l6  THE  BIBLE. 

that  which  brings  the  Gospel  to  us,  first  and  im- 
mediately ;  in  our  Bible  countries,  as  much  as  in 
that  island  of  Sicily  where,  corrupt  as  it  was,  it 
has  made  those  whom  this  man  represented 
familiar  with  the  redeeming  verities  that  are  in 
Christ  Jesus. 

And  was  not  this  organization  or  brotherhood 
intrusted  with  just  this  commission  ?  Was  it 
not  founded  to  preach  the  Gospel  ?  Were  not 
Apostles  sent  to  send  others  to  spread  what  they 
received  from  Christ  ?  No  mention  is  made  of 
the  Bible  in  the  foundation  of  Christianity ; 
nothing  is  said' about  it  to  the  Apostles  ;  neither 
Jesus  nor  they  ever  spoke  of  it  as  the  means  to 
save  men.  That  is  said  to  be  effected  through 
"  the  foolishness  of  preaching  ;  "  that  is,  through 
the  ministry  of  the  Church,  which  came  into 
being  to  be  the  transmitter  of  the  Gospel  through 
the  centuries. 

And  the  history  of  this  precious  Book  shows 
that  it  could  have  no  such  intention.  We  have 
seen  that  it  was  a  collection  of  Apostolic  writrngs 
composed  after  the  Gospel  had  begun  to  be 
preached,  and  when  the  work  was  well  under 
way.  It  was  several  hundred  years  before  the 
Bible  as  we  have  it  was  in  existence.  How,  then, 
can  it  be  claimed  to  be  the  transmitter  of  Chris- 
tianity, the  one  divinely  intended  means  to  that 
end,  when  not  only  has  the  Gospel  been  trans- 
mitted since  without  it,  but  when  it  did  not  exist 
at  the  time  that   transmission  was   commanded 


THE  BIBLE.  21  7 

and  begun ;  when  another  means  was  provided 
for  that  purpose  ;  when  the  Bible  was  in  a  sense 
the  Church's  creation,  not  at  all  its  creator  ? 

What,  then,  is  the  place  of  the  Bible  ?  Again, 
our  Sicilian  helps  us  to  decide  this.  He  knew 
and  saw  that  there  were  corruptions  in  the 
Christianity  about  him,  and  in  the  Church  to 
which  he  owed  so  much,  and  he  wished  some- 
thing by  which  he  could  detect  and  correct  them. 
This  is  still  our  constant  need.  The  Church 
that  hands  down  the  faith,  and  was  founded  to 
that  end,  is  composed  of  fallible  and  erring  men, 
and  it  was  to  be  feared  that  the  light  which  it 
started  out  to  bear  would  be  dimmed.  Tradition, 
while  living  on,  is  liable  to  become  impure  as  its 
stream  flows  through  the  circumstances  of  time. 
Again,  as  we  have  seen,  Christians  would  and 
should  pursue  the  task  of  theological  inquiry 
into  the  faith  committed  to  them  as  facts  to  be 
fathomed.  But  the  human  mind  is  imperfect  in 
its  processes ;  its  best  reasoning  is  precarious  ; 
the  deeper  its  speculations  the  larger  the  liabil- 
ity to  stray.  Therefore,  for  these  as  well  as  for 
other  reasons,  some  standard  would  be  needed 
whereby  to  detect  deviations  from  the  path  that 
leads  into  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  as  it  is  in 
Jesus.  This  truth  may  be  classified  as  the  truth 
regarding  the  Church's  foundation  ;  the  explana- 
tion or  amplification  of  the  Saviour's  work ;  and 
the  prophecies  of  the  future  of  the  world,  of  the 
Church,  and  of  the  individual. 


2l8  THE  BIBLE. 

Now  what  should  be  the  standard  regarding 
such  matters  ?  It  can  only  be  what  Apostles 
taught,  preserved  in  the  changeless  form  of  docu- 
ments. Then,  if  that  which  they  had  taught, 
being  preserved  in  other  ways,  in  tradition  and 
in  institutions,  became  mingled  with  error,  com- 
parison with  this  that  they  had  written  would 
show  the  fact.  So  came  about  the  compilation 
of  the  New  Testament,  and  therewith  the  use  of 
the  Old,  which  these  men  endorsed  and  said  that 
Christ  endorsed. 

For  Christians  soon  found  out  two  things. 
One  was  that  the  career  of  the  Church  was  to  be 
longer  than  they  had  supposed,  when,  at  first, 
they  had  anticipated  the  speedy  return  of  the 
Lord.  The  other  was  that  as  the  years  of  this 
career  should  succeed,  and  primitive  days  grow 
more  remote,  there  would  increase  an  already 
perceptible  tendency  to  introduce  foreign  ele- 
ments, to  draw  dangerous  inferences,  to  add  un- 
warranted doctrines,  joined  with  a  lessening  ca- 
pacity to  detect  such  aberrations,  owing  to  the 
allurements  and  influences  of  the  world.  So 
they  desired,  with  yearly  increasing  intensity, 
such  a  picture  of  Christ  and  such  statements  of 
His  work,  such  a  setting  forth  of  the  Gospel  of 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  such  utterances 
about  the  facts  of  that  Gospel,  as  would  form  an 
unchanging  standard  of  comparison.  Christian- 
ity must  always,  as  we  have  seen,  agree  with  the 
conditions  of  its  beginning.     The  edifice  must 


THE  BIBLE.  219 

always  be  consistent  with  the  foundation.  It 
may  grow,  and  new  features  and  new  factors 
may  be  added,  but  there  must  be  no  violation  of 
the  original  design.  Clearly,  the  only  way  to  be 
sure  of  this  agreement  is  ever  to  refer  to  written 
words  of  such  men  as  were  charged  to  found  the 
Church,  and  start  it  on  its  career  with  the  Gospel 
received  from  Him  on  whom  it  is  built ;  for  what 
is  written  down  is  not  subject  to  adulteration,  as 
that  which  is  not  must  always  be. 

So  Christians  soon  began  to  collect  all  such 
writings  as  they  could  gather  from  the  various 
churches  and  individuals  that  had  received  them. 
Care  was  exercised  in  accepting  such  alleged 
documents.  Some  were  found  earlier  than  oth- 
ers. Some  were  not  received  as  authentic  so 
soon  as  others.  But  the  Gospels  and  the  chief 
Epistles  were  collected  and  generally  used  after 
a  hundred  years  or  less  ;  the  remaining  books 
were  accepted  gradually  by  Christendom,  and  at 
length,  after  about  five  centuries,  the  process 
was  finished,  and  that  Volume  which  we  have  was 
completed,  as  the  result  of  effort  to  gain  as  com- 
plete as  possible  a  presentation  of  Christ  and  His 
work,  in  the  written  words  of  Apostolic  men. 
We  see  in  this  result  the  undeniable  evidences 
of  the  Providence  of  God  superintending  this  hu- 
man work,  and  in  the  component  parts  we  dis- 
cern that  inspiration  which  can  only  come  from 
Him. 

Now  to  this  end,  the  detecting  of  deviations 


220  THE  BIBLE. 

and  corruptions  in  the  Church's  transmission  of 
the  faith  received,  it  has  ever  served.  It  has 
led  to  every  reformation  that  has  taken  place,  by 
showing  when  it  was  required  and  what  was 
needed.  It  was  the  power  in  the  great  Reforma- 
tion, and  was  used  to  lead  Christians  back  to 
conformity  with  original  Christianity.  It  ena- 
bled them  to  discriminate  as  to  what  should  be 
retained  and  what  rejected  out  of  the  growths 
and  modifications  of  fifteen  centuries.  It  is 
doing  that  work  now.  Its  use  is  not  over. 
Thinkers  and  students  are  asking  whether  there 
may  not  yet  remain  unwarranted  elements  in 
Christian  life  and  thought ;  and  they  are  finding 
that  there  are  things  received  that  are  not  as 
harmonious  with  the  unchanged  Apostolic  teach- 
ing as  has  been  supposed  by  the  popular  reli- 
gionism of  the  day ;  that  perhaps  the  Reforma- 
tion, which  some  think  completed  three  hundred 
years  ago,  was  after  all,  in  unsuspected  directions, 
unfinished.  Beyond  this,  the  application  of  this 
standard  is  causing  searchings  of  heart  among 
Protestants,  and  showing  that,  in  their  theology 
as  in  their  polity,  they  cannot  rely  upon  their 
traditions ;  that  they  may  be  involved  in  depar- 
tures from  the  Apostolic  norm  as  truly  as  the 
Romanists  whom  they  have  been  regarding  as 
alone  open  to  the  charge  of  unscriptural  doc- 
trine. To  some  of  us,  it  is  as  difficult  to  see 
how  many  who  claim  to  be  Bible  Christians  are 
any  less   violating  New   Testament    indications 


THE  BIBLE.  221 

than  the  veriest  and  extremest  Papist.  Many  a 
sect  that  calls  itself  Evangelical  has  yet  to  learn 
that  its  traditions  are  not  more  sure  than  the 
papal,  being  only  what  its  people  have  received 
from  their  fathers  ;  not  drawn  from  the  Bible,  as 
they  claim,  but  injected  into  it :  the  interpreta- 
tions of  prejudgment. 

But  this  position  of  the  Bible,  as  the  divinely 
given  norm  to  keep  the  Church  true  in  the  ut- 
terance of  its  message,  has  not  been  sufficiently 
remembered,  and  several  serious  consequences 
have  resulted  thence. 

One  is  that  it  has  been  so  identified  with 
Christianity  that  belief  in  it  has  been  made  syn- 
onymous with  belief  in  Christ.  It  has  been  put 
in  His  place  as  the  object  of  faith.  It  has  come 
between  the  soul  and  Him,  as  really,  though  not 
as  disastrously,  perhaps,  as  sacerdotalism  has 
ever  done.  But,  whatever  value  this  Volume 
may  have,  whatever  our  estimate  of  it,  our  rela- 
tion to  it  must  not  in  any  degree  supplant  our 
relationship  to  our  Lord.  Christianity  is  trust 
in  Him,  living  discipleship  of  Him  ;  and  the  only 
value  of  anything  else  can  be  that  it  helps  us 
in  that  discipleship.  To  believe  in  the  Bible's 
every  word  does  not  make  us  believers  in  the 
Gospel.  Never  to  see  it,  and  so  not  to  believe 
a  word  of  it  because  unknown,  or  not  to  believe 
this  or  that  part  of  its  narrations,  does  not  nec- 
essarily render  us  unbelievers  in  Jesus  Christ. 

Again,  this  abuse  of  the  Bible,  as  practically 


222  THE  BIBLE. 

identifying  belief  in  it  with  belief  in  Christ,  has, 
it  is  to  be  feared,  stood  in  the  way  of  many  a 
conversion  to  Christ.  Because  of  misinforma- 
tion, or  the  influences  of  unwise  teachers,  some 
have  accepted  this  identification  as  true ;  and, 
not  being  able  to  accept  this  or  that  thing  in  its 
pages,  this  or  that  book  even,  as  what  they  think 
divine,  they  have  given  up  their  belief  in  it,  and 
then  their  Christianity.  They  could  be  Chris- 
tians, but  are  not  able  to  agree  with  their  de- 
nomination or  their  Church  about  this  Volume. 
Others  have  been  turned  away  by  the  very  idea 
that  faith  is  to  rest  upon  a  book  at  all,  to  which 
they  had  thought  Christianity  committed  ;  for 
this  is  evidently  not  the  meaning  of  faith,  to  an 
intelligently  religious  man. 

Again,  this  identification  of  Christianity  with 
this  precious  book  has  led  assailants  to  think 
that,  in  destroying  its  credibility  by  controverting 
some  of  its  contents,  they  overthrow  the  faith  it- 
self. This  is  the  position  of  the  ordinary  infidel 
orator.  He  shouts  Victory !  when  he  has  made 
some  audience  believe  that  he  has  destroyed  the 
trustworthiness  of  the  Bible  by  an  attack  upon 
some  of  its  parts.  And  the  trouble  is  that  many 
Christians  accept  the  issue.  They  cannot  help 
it,  since,  not  believing  in  any  other  pillar  and 
ground  of  the  faith,  any  argument  against  the 
Bible  is  one  against  all  belief  in  Christ.  But 
this  is  all  a  mistake.  Many  Christians,  like  my 
Sicilian  friend,  never  saw  a  Bible,  and  we  must 


THE   BIBLE.  223 

not  make  Christianity  stand  or  fall  with  it.  It 
not  only  is  a  false  position,  it  makes  the  defense 
of  our  faith  difficult.  We  can  defend  that  Vol- 
ume, we  are  not  afraid  to  meet  that  issue,  but 
we  must  not  admit  that  reasons  for  belief  in 
Christ  are  dependent  upon  and  identical  with  our 
ability  to  conduct  so  learned  and  so  intricate  an 
argument  as  that  for  a  collection  of  many  docu- 
ments of  ancient  times.  Nor  must  we  admit 
that,  when  some  eloquent  caviler  has  overthrown 
the  literal  accuracy  of  some  incident  in  the  Old 
Testament,  or  shown  that  Jael  was  wrong  in  kill- 
ing Sisera,  or  that  perhaps  St.  Peter  did  not 
write  the  second  epistle  that  bears  his  name,  or 
that  St.  John  did  not  write  his  Gospel,  —  that 
then  he  had  destroyed  all  reasons  for  believing  in 
the  Gospel  of  the  Son  of  God,  preached  in  sac- 
rament and  holy  season,  in  ordinances  and  insti- 
tutions coming  to  us  by  a  different  and  an  in- 
dependent channel. 

Another  consequence  of  imagining  that  the 
Bible  is  the  sole  container  and  intended  trans- 
mitter of  Christianity  is,  that  we  are  not  to  hold 
or  believe  anything  not  therein  found,  a  position 
touched  upon  in  another  lecture.  If  it  were 
such,  and  if  that  position  had  such  a  basis,  the 
results  would  be  very  inconvenient.  It  would 
leave  us,  as  we  have  seen,  without  explicit  war- 
rant for  infant  baptism,  or  Sunday  observance,  or 
admission  of  women  to  either  Sacrament,  and 
other   customs.      But,    when    we    consider   that 


224  THE  BIBLE. 

the  New  Testament  consists  of  books  and  let- 
ters written  for  special  purposes  to  certain  Chris- 
tians, we  see  that,  after  all,  it  may  be  possible 
that  there  were  Apostolic  practices  and  original 
teachings  or  generally  known  principles,  which 
did  not  happen  to  be  referred  to  in  an  occa- 
sional correspondence.  And  when  we  take  the 
evidently  true  position,  that  the  function  of  the 
Bible  is,  not  to  transmit  the  Gospel,  but  as  a 
norm  to  regulate  its  transmission  by  the  Church, 
because  composed  of  written  utterances  of  the 
Church's  founders,  together  with  ancient  docu- 
ments which  they  endorse  as  sacred  and  inspired, 
then  we  are  not  wholly  dependent  upon  the  letter 
of  its  contents. 

This  is  the  position  taken  by  the  German  and 
the  English  Reformations,  as  distinct  from  the 
Calvinistic  ;  which  latter,  not  indeed  in  practice, 
yet  in  theory,  confines  Christianity  to  Bible  lim- 
itations. The  former  is  not  only  clearly  the  true 
one,  but  it  is  alone  the  position  that  can  meet 
many  objectors,  and  spare  us  many  difficulties  in 
our  defense  of  essential  Christianity.  For  when 
we  consider  that  the  Bible  is  not  Christ,  and  be- 
lief in  the  Bible  is  not  identical  with  belief  in 
Christ,  we  need  not  feel  anxious  as  to  assaults 
upon  His  faith  that  are  only  based  upon  criti- 
cism of  its  pages.  We  can  say  to  the  ordinary 
assailant,  Why  do  you  attack  our  handbook  ? 
What  has  that  to  do  with  our  faith  ?  There  are 
plenty  of  Christians  who  know  nothing  of  it,  in 


THE  BIBLE.  225 

other  lands  and  in  our  own,  whose  faith  in  the 
Gospel  rests  on  another  basis.  Now  deal  with 
that  faith.  We  give  you  all  you  ask,  for  the 
sake  of  argument,  and  tell  you  that  we  believe 
in  the  Gospel  because  it  reaches  us  through  the 
preaching,  the  sacraments,  the  institutions,  the 
life,  the  services,  the  creeds  of  the  Church ;  a  con- 
tinuous stream  of  holy  life  ;  the  tradition  passed 
on  through  the  centuries  from  saint  to  saint,  and 
minister  to  minister.  What  have  you  to  say  to 
that  ?  Your  task  has  only  begun,  you  have  done 
nothing,  until  you  give  us  reasons  for  not  believ- 
ing in  this  Gospel  which  thus  reaches  us.  De- 
stroy that  Book  if  you  will  and  can,  but  still  tell 
us  why  we  should  not  rest  upon  this  Christ, 
whose  story,  and  whose  Good  News,  is  no  more 
dependent  upon  it  than  the  story  of  a  Washing- 
ton is  dependent  upon  some  biography  of  him. 
We  prize  that  Volume,  we  will  defend  it,  but 
your  disbelief  in  its  alleged  character,  or  your 
assaults  on  it,  do  not  touch  the  faith  in  Christ 
which  began  before  it  existed,  and  has  blessed 
many  without  it  ever  since. 

And  so  we  see  the  value  of  that  divinely  given 
Book,  as  we  hold  it.  It  preserves  in  undimmed 
clearness  the  picture  of  that  Christ  who  lives  in 
the  Church,  who  is  its  foundation  and  its  theme. 
It  preserves,  in  changeless  form,  utterances  of 
inspired  men  who  gave  to  the  Church  the  story 
of  its  Lord,  the  explanation  of  His  work,  the 
prophecies  of  its  future,  the  assurances  of  His 


226  THE  BIBLE. 

triumph,  and  the  hope  of  a  glorious  immortality 
for  His  people.  Therefore  it  is  precious  beyond 
all  other  books  conceivable.  It  is  the  standard, 
the  criterion  by  which  the  Church  is  ever  to  try 
its  fidelity  to  its  mission.  It  is  the  test  which  de- 
tects adulteration  in  the  food  man  feeds  on.  Or, 
rather,  it  is  the  compass  which  detects  and  cor- 
rects the  deviations  of  the  ship,  the  ark  of  the 
Church,  in  which  we  voyage  towards  our  rest ; 
that  without  which  men  in  their  ignorance 
might  and  would  be  borne  far  astray  ere  they 
reached  the  goal  of  their  voyage.  It  is  the  book 
that  alone  can  keep  true  the  melody  of  that  mes- 
sage which  the  people  of  God  are  to  proclaim  in 
this  world, — the  handbook  on  earth  for  those 
whose  names  are  written  in  the  Lamb's  Book  of 
Life.  This  is  well  expressed  in  the  ancient  seal 
of  Harvard.  Across  an  open  Bible  is  written 
the  word  "Veritas."  To  the  credit  of  the  found- 
ers of  that  honored  institution,  this  ever  reminds 
its  members  that,  amid  all  activity  of  thought 
and  all  progress  of  learning,  however  sound,  the 
only  truth  that  is  free  from  liability  to  human 
error,  unmixed  with  the  results  of  human  limita- 
tions, is  that  regarding  Jesus  Christ,  the  Truth 
Incarnate,  which  is  found  in  that  Volume  where 
we  have  it  in  the  written  words  of  Apostolic 
men. 

One  evening,  as  I  walked  to  my  hotel  after 
one  of  my  Sicilian  Vespers,  I  tarried  awhile  in 
the  moonlight  by  the  fountain  of  Arethusa.     It 


THE  BIBLE.  227 

welled  up  murmuringly  under  the  waving  palms, 
surrounded  by  the  tufted  papyri  that  tell  of  the 
sojourn  of  the  Saracen  in  this  often  conquered 
and  reconquered  island. 

When  the  Greek  colonists  first  came  to  settle 
here,  back  in  the  dawn  of  history,  they  made 
their  home  about  this  crystal  spring.  But  as  it 
rises  on  a  little  island,  separate  from  the  main- 
land of  Sicily,  the  present  though  not  the  an- 
cient limits  of  the  town  of  Syracuse,  they  won- 
dered whence  could  come  this  fresh  and  limpid 
water,  about  which  the  salt  waves  beat  so  close 
at  hand.  In  their  love  of  home,  and  in  their 
fondness  for  poetic  fancy,  these  colonists  dwelt 
upon  the  mystery,  until  it  came  to  be  believed 
that  this  fountain  had  flowed  beneath  the  sea 
from  distant  Hellas,  and  that  in  it  they  drank  of 
water  fed  by  the  rains  and  dews  of  Elis,  that 
home  whence  the  fathers  had  come  forth,  and 
where  Grecian  life  was  truer,  purer  than  ever  it 
could  be  elsewhere,  though  fair  were  the  skies 
and  rich  the  fields  of  Sicily. 

And  so,  it  seemed  to  me,  is  it  with  these  Scrip- 
tures of  which  we  had  been  speaking,  and  which 
my  friend  had  welcomed.  As  the  Church  wan- 
ders on  through  the  ages,  and  spreads  through 
distant  lands,  ever  more  remote  from  its  birth- 
place, its  members,  however  favored  their  abodes 
or  great  their  progress,  wish  to  keep  in  touch 
with  the  days  and  the  life  of  its  origin,  ever  be 
nurtured  by  the  dews  of  its  birth.     They  know 


228  THE  BIBLE. 

that  there  is  the  ideal  of  Christian  living  and 
thinking,  which,  though  simpler  than  their  own 
may  be,  must  yet  never  be  departed  from,  in  the 
changes  that  time  may  bring,  or  the  larger  light 
that  experience  and  thought  may  give.  This 
ideal  is  preserved  in  the  Bible,  which,  like  that 
mysterious  fountain,  has  come  beneath  the  sea  of 
time,  unaffected  by  the  billows  of  history,  un- 
changed since  it  issued  from  the  scenes  of  the 
home  whence  we  came  out.  In  it  can  we  be  re- 
freshed by  draughts  that  have  the  invigorating 
power  of  sources  that  rose  on  the  mount  where 
Apostles  sojourned  with  the  now  unseen  Lord. 
By  it  can  the  Church  be  kept  from  error  in  its 
task  of  reproducing,  upon  every  shore  and  in 
every  age,  the  spirit  of  the  days  of  its  youth. 

Therefore  nothing  can  take  its  place.  Before 
it,  all  must  bow  in  reverence.  In  conflict  with 
it,  no  voice,  no  authority  is  valid.  While  we 
hear  the  Church,  the  commissioned  preacher  of 
the  Everlasting  Gospel,  yet  we  must,  like  the 
Bereans  of  old,  even  in  presence  of  its  utterances, 
exercise  our  privilege  to  search  the  Scriptures  to 
see  whether  those  things  are  so. 


Date  Due 

— ~* 

i 

<f 

■r 


■■■■I 

KW 

ra£f 

*3r 

■BFk 

ShS 

ECmSh 

iSfl 

Huj 

% 

' 

mEw 

■ 

■■■■■■■EHi— 

mBHHHF 

aB|B|p. 

HI  I B  BBfl 


1  I  ■   >.'/  ■■■■■1  . 

■sIbbsT 


ra&s 


■■■■■■1 
H 
i  Si  - 


■■■bvbvI 


■■■■■■■1 


1HL 


